Chicago Fanatics Message Board https://mail.chicagofanatics.com/ |
|
Women Drivers! https://mail.chicagofanatics.com/viewtopic.php?f=100&t=112004 |
Page 1 of 2 |
Author: | America [ Tue Apr 17, 2018 4:01 pm ] |
Post subject: | Women Drivers! |
Averted pretty major disaster on a Southwest flight. |
Author: | Nas [ Tue Apr 17, 2018 4:08 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Women Drivers! |
Lady Nas hit a deer 2 weeks ago in the middle of the day on a street with a speed limit of 35 mph. She said the deer ran at her. She's been in at least 5 accidents in the past 15 months and all but the last one was in my car. Thankfully none were serious. |
Author: | Ogie Oglethorpe [ Tue Apr 17, 2018 4:22 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Women Drivers! |
It sounds like the engine failure was the least of their worries as those planes can fly easily with 1 engine. I don't know if this has been confirmed, but I heard reports they had lost hydraulics. If true, then this could've very easily ended like UA-232 (and that getting to an airport and having any survivors there was miracle in itself) In UA-232 the fan blade int he #2 engine of a DC-10 broke apart and when the fan blade separated, it cut all the hydraulics. I don't think this plane had such a serious fault in the hydraulics, but any loss of function there is very troubling. |
Author: | America [ Tue Apr 17, 2018 4:28 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Women Drivers! |
There was a maintenance deficiency. No way a cowling on a 737 shouldn't be able to keep an uncontained engine failure from blowng out a window. First EVER passenger fatality for Southwest and first in the USA in 9 years. |
Author: | Nas [ Tue Apr 17, 2018 4:33 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Women Drivers! |
So she died. I thought the passengers saved her. |
Author: | IkeSouth [ Tue Apr 17, 2018 4:45 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Women Drivers! |
America wrote: There was a maintenance deficiency. No way a cowling on a 737 shouldn't be able to keep an uncontained engine failure from blowng out a window. First EVER passenger fatality for Southwest and first in the USA in 9 years. i wouldnt doubt it. i can not for the life of me believe we havent had a downed plane in so many years... especially after the fuel cost rises and then the 08 depression, the airlines were struggling BAD and anytime any company struggles the first cuts are to maintenance. |
Author: | Ogie Oglethorpe [ Tue Apr 17, 2018 4:54 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Women Drivers! |
IkeSouth wrote: America wrote: There was a maintenance deficiency. No way a cowling on a 737 shouldn't be able to keep an uncontained engine failure from blowng out a window. First EVER passenger fatality for Southwest and first in the USA in 9 years. i wouldnt doubt it. i can not for the life of me believe we havent had a downed plane in so many years... especially after the fuel cost rises and then the 08 depression, the airlines were struggling BAD and anytime any company struggles the first cuts are to maintenance. It comes down to the fact that the technology on aircraft is constantly evolving and becoming safer. Had this failure or the dual engine failure on Sully's splashdown in the Hudson occurred on an older aircraft, they likely wouldn't have made it. The planes have a lot of redundant systems in them so that if you suffer a catastrophic failure, you still have control of the aircraft. Had this Southwest aircraft been a 737 Classic for example and not a 737 NG, it may not have had back-up hydraulics when a line was punctured or a way to contain the hydraulic leak. We'll find out more about this as NTSB investigates, but I suspect we will find the back-up hydraulic systems helped the flight crew maintain control where an older aircraft (let's look at UA-232) was virtually uncontrollable. Also, the airlines still work to keep the planes very safe as the public won't fly if there is a perception that flying is anything but safe. Just look at how widespread a fear of flying actually is despite the fact you are far more likely to die driving to the airport than you are while on your actual flight. |
Author: | IkeSouth [ Tue Apr 17, 2018 5:47 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Women Drivers! |
Ogie Oglethorpe wrote: IkeSouth wrote: America wrote: There was a maintenance deficiency. No way a cowling on a 737 shouldn't be able to keep an uncontained engine failure from blowng out a window. First EVER passenger fatality for Southwest and first in the USA in 9 years. i wouldnt doubt it. i can not for the life of me believe we havent had a downed plane in so many years... especially after the fuel cost rises and then the 08 depression, the airlines were struggling BAD and anytime any company struggles the first cuts are to maintenance. It comes down to the fact that the technology on aircraft is constantly evolving and becoming safer. Had this failure or the dual engine failure on Sully's splashdown in the Hudson occurred on an older aircraft, they likely wouldn't have made it. The planes have a lot of redundant systems in them so that if you suffer a catastrophic failure, you still have control of the aircraft. Had this Southwest aircraft been a 737 Classic for example and not a 737 NG, it may not have had back-up hydraulics when a line was punctured or a way to contain the hydraulic leak. We'll find out more about this as NTSB investigates, but I suspect we will find the back-up hydraulic systems helped the flight crew maintain control where an older aircraft (let's look at UA-232) was virtually uncontrollable. Also, the airlines still work to keep the planes very safe as the public won't fly if there is a perception that flying is anything but safe. Just look at how widespread a fear of flying actually is despite the fact you are far more likely to die driving to the airport than you are while on your actual flight. why did you just do that? i did not say anything that contradicted your response nor did i even ask a question. youre just like most of my girlfriends. i say one comment and it draws an immediate thorough explanation of who the fuck cares that i dont need. |
Author: | Franky T [ Tue Apr 17, 2018 6:32 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Women Drivers! |
IkeSouth wrote: Ogie Oglethorpe wrote: IkeSouth wrote: America wrote: There was a maintenance deficiency. No way a cowling on a 737 shouldn't be able to keep an uncontained engine failure from blowng out a window. First EVER passenger fatality for Southwest and first in the USA in 9 years. i wouldnt doubt it. i can not for the life of me believe we havent had a downed plane in so many years... especially after the fuel cost rises and then the 08 depression, the airlines were struggling BAD and anytime any company struggles the first cuts are to maintenance. It comes down to the fact that the technology on aircraft is constantly evolving and becoming safer. Had this failure or the dual engine failure on Sully's splashdown in the Hudson occurred on an older aircraft, they likely wouldn't have made it. The planes have a lot of redundant systems in them so that if you suffer a catastrophic failure, you still have control of the aircraft. Had this Southwest aircraft been a 737 Classic for example and not a 737 NG, it may not have had back-up hydraulics when a line was punctured or a way to contain the hydraulic leak. We'll find out more about this as NTSB investigates, but I suspect we will find the back-up hydraulic systems helped the flight crew maintain control where an older aircraft (let's look at UA-232) was virtually uncontrollable. Also, the airlines still work to keep the planes very safe as the public won't fly if there is a perception that flying is anything but safe. Just look at how widespread a fear of flying actually is despite the fact you are far more likely to die driving to the airport than you are while on your actual flight. why did you just do that? i did not say anything that contradicted your response nor did i even ask a question. youre just like most of my girlfriends. i say one comment and it draws an immediate thorough explanation of who the fuck cares that i dont need. Yeah Ogie, STFU! |
Author: | leashyourkids [ Tue Apr 17, 2018 6:35 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Women Drivers! |
IkeSouth wrote: Ogie Oglethorpe wrote: IkeSouth wrote: America wrote: There was a maintenance deficiency. No way a cowling on a 737 shouldn't be able to keep an uncontained engine failure from blowng out a window. First EVER passenger fatality for Southwest and first in the USA in 9 years. i wouldnt doubt it. i can not for the life of me believe we havent had a downed plane in so many years... especially after the fuel cost rises and then the 08 depression, the airlines were struggling BAD and anytime any company struggles the first cuts are to maintenance. It comes down to the fact that the technology on aircraft is constantly evolving and becoming safer. Had this failure or the dual engine failure on Sully's splashdown in the Hudson occurred on an older aircraft, they likely wouldn't have made it. The planes have a lot of redundant systems in them so that if you suffer a catastrophic failure, you still have control of the aircraft. Had this Southwest aircraft been a 737 Classic for example and not a 737 NG, it may not have had back-up hydraulics when a line was punctured or a way to contain the hydraulic leak. We'll find out more about this as NTSB investigates, but I suspect we will find the back-up hydraulic systems helped the flight crew maintain control where an older aircraft (let's look at UA-232) was virtually uncontrollable. Also, the airlines still work to keep the planes very safe as the public won't fly if there is a perception that flying is anything but safe. Just look at how widespread a fear of flying actually is despite the fact you are far more likely to die driving to the airport than you are while on your actual flight. why did you just do that? i did not say anything that contradicted your response nor did i even ask a question. youre just like most of my girlfriends. i say one comment and it draws an immediate thorough explanation of who the fuck cares that i dont need. Sorry Ogie |
Author: | SpiralStairs [ Tue Apr 17, 2018 6:43 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Women Drivers! |
Apparently the chick that died was the one nearly sucked out the window. Once again, the lesson is never try. |
Author: | Nas [ Tue Apr 17, 2018 6:49 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Women Drivers! |
SpiralStairs wrote: Apparently the chick that died was the one nearly sucked out the window. Once again, the lesson is never try. I'm assuming the glass did it. I love window seats. I'm happy MANY will be afraid of them now. |
Author: | Bagels [ Tue Apr 17, 2018 7:00 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Women Drivers! |
America wrote: First EVER passenger fatality for Southwest and first in the USA in 9 years. Wanna get away ? |
Author: | Darkside [ Tue Apr 17, 2018 7:49 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Women Drivers! |
Frank isnt going to like this shout out one bit. |
Author: | Hussra [ Tue Apr 17, 2018 7:55 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Women Drivers! |
aisle seats toward the tail of the plane--best place to sit to survive plane crashes. Also, as the plane is going down, if you stand up and time it just right, just as the plane hits the ground leap into the air as far as you can and you'll only sustain minor injuries. Some of this is true, some of this is better. |
Author: | America [ Tue Apr 17, 2018 7:56 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Women Drivers! |
It's usually not the crash that kills you but the fire. |
Author: | newper [ Tue Apr 17, 2018 8:35 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Women Drivers! |
America wrote: It's usually not the crash that kills you but the fire. And it is usually not the fire but the smoke inhalation. |
Author: | Franky T [ Tue Apr 17, 2018 9:21 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Women Drivers! |
newper wrote: America wrote: It's usually not the crash that kills you but the fire. And it is usually not the fire but the smoke inhalation. Thanks for making dying in a plane crash worse than it already sounds. "It's not the impact of the crash that kills you. You will die being trapped in your seat inhaling fumes from the gasoline that just exploded around you". |
Author: | Drunk Squirrel [ Tue Apr 17, 2018 10:11 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Women Drivers! |
It’s not an irrational fear of flying, it’s irrational concern of landing method. |
Author: | Frank Coztansa [ Wed Apr 18, 2018 11:28 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Women Drivers! |
This pilot of the SWA plane was awesome, but I bet she can't parallel park to save her soul. |
Author: | KDdidit [ Wed Apr 18, 2018 11:32 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Women Drivers! |
They played the cockpit audio on the radio and she sounded as calm as you'd expect a former Navy F/A-18 pilot to be. The best was when she said “They said there’s a hole, and uh, someone went out” like she was reading a phone book. |
Author: | Frank Coztansa [ Wed Apr 18, 2018 11:35 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Women Drivers! |
Most CVR audio is like that. Listen to Sully's crash in the Hudson, or the Sioux City crash that Ogie mentioned. At one point there, the pilot makes a joke about ATC calling off a specific runway for them to land on. |
Author: | Nardi [ Wed Apr 18, 2018 5:58 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Women Drivers! |
"They said there’s a hole, and uh, someone went out” That's what you get when you don't wear your seat belt. |
Author: | sinicalypse [ Wed Apr 18, 2018 6:10 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Women Drivers! |
Drunk Squirrel wrote: It’s not an irrational fear of flying, it’s irrational concern of landing method. i always hope my pilot got laid last night, that things are on the up-n-up with the lady at home/whatever, and that the dude has some engaging plans for next weekend. there's that fundamental paradigm with flying where you're going to be in a situation hearkening certain doom should the [OMFG-PLZ-NO] happen and you're 100.0% decidedly not in control and/or contribution to the situation (unless, of course, you have your personal electronics going right b4 or after takeoff/landing =) at least with a taxi/bus/uber/lyft/ride you've theoretically got a chance. with a plane crash, man, let's just say my last name isn't kimble. |
Author: | Cheap Charlie [ Fri Apr 20, 2018 8:09 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Women Drivers! |
From my Navy / Airline mates. From a friend: Scuttlebutt on SWA Captain on 737 with uncontained catastrophic engine failure: Just got briefed by a SWA check captain friend who said she was a former Navy A-7 pilot who was not able to get tactically qual’d. She was ferrying an A7 to the bone yard and crashed it. He said she also crashed a King Air. She falsified her SWA application in stating she had never been in an accident. I was told SWA fired her twice for poor performance but lawyers got-her job back. Her lawyer argued the A7 crash was only an incident because it was already written of the Navy inventory when she destroyed it. So, he reasoned it had no value; therefore it became an incident not an accident which need not be reported. Check Pilot added that she is a PC Nazi know to litigate frequently, waiting to have you prosecuted by her attorney who she has on speed dial. And finally, he said the copilot did all the efforts to handle this event through getting it on the ground. FUBAR! Hambone |
Author: | Frank Coztansa [ Fri Apr 20, 2018 8:36 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Women Drivers! |
Fuck you. |
Author: | Douchebag [ Fri Apr 20, 2018 8:42 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Women Drivers! |
All of that sounds completely legit. |
Author: | 312player [ Fri Apr 20, 2018 8:42 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Women Drivers! |
KDdidit wrote: They played the cockpit audio on the radio and she sounded as calm as you'd expect a former Navy F/A-18 pilot to be. The best was when she said “They said there’s a hole, and uh, someone went out” like she was reading a phone book. I'm surprised more air craft carrier pilots from the navy aren't pilots, that's gotta be extremely difficult to land on those. |
Author: | 312player [ Fri Apr 20, 2018 8:44 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Women Drivers! |
I'm thinkin a goose hit that blade and weakened it prior to the flight. You'd think a pre flight inspection would have uncovered this. |
Author: | Ogie Oglethorpe [ Fri Apr 20, 2018 8:52 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Women Drivers! |
312player wrote: I'm thinkin a goose hit that blade and weakened it prior to the flight. You'd think a pre flight inspection would have uncovered this. A bird strike would've caused noticeable damage to the engine prior. Going by past examples of uncontained engine failures, you will likely find fatigue in the fan blades. |
Page 1 of 2 | All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ] |
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group https://www.phpbb.com/ |