Mayday mayday the terror on flight 32

[Flying Fox]

If anyone missed this 'show' and would like to see it for themselves, it seems to be on again tonight on GEM @ 8:30pm.

BYO airsick bag cos this show might make you vomit

PS. when I watched it, I noticed that this particular A380 only had 2 thrust levers (I had a chuckle) so it must have been a QF Special Order

I'm sure that there were many many more errors that I missed.

 

[mannej]

PS. when I watched it, I noticed that this particular A380 only had 2 thrust levers (I had a chuckle) so it must have been a QF Special Order

I'm sure that there were many many more errors that I missed.

On a similar note, ACI is similar. If you check the cabin layouts out you will see what I mean. Minor detail for some

 

[RooFlyer]

<snip>

BTW, anyone read Richard de C's book on QF32 ? Worth the effort ?

Yes, read it, quite enjoyable (I'm a mug punter - no technical knowledge). Its not just about QF32.

 

[drron]

Glad I read this thread before it starts on Gem tonight.

 

[timster]

ACI's vastly superior effort on QF32 is now hitting the airwaves worldwide. One of several YT links now online:
Air Crash Investigation S13E10 - Qantas 32: Titanic In The Sky - YouTube

Given that the ACI air date this week has been known for some time, one wonders why Channel 9 bothered to air their disgraceful effort.

 

[harvyk]

PS. when I watched it, I noticed that this particular A380 only had 2 thrust levers (I had a chuckle) so it must have been a QF Special Order

I'm sure that there were many many more errors that I missed.

Well there's the problem, they forgot to order the version which lets them control all 4 engines. No wonder they had problems... I'm surprised the plane flew for as long as it did...

Given that the ACI air date this week has been known for some time, one wonders why Channel 9 bothered to air their disgraceful effort.

They aired it because ACI is typically on 7... Plus the average bogan doesn't exactly care about things like accuracy but they do like seeing explosions and crashes (the only reason why AirNZ / UA was in there, plus the dramatic over the top engine explosions), it was a cheap win win as far as 9 was concerned...

 

[serfty]

...

Given that the ACI air date this week has been known for some time, one wonders why Channel 9 bothered to air their disgraceful effort.

Easy - get in first with any old rubbish - - punters may see the promo and think "oh I have seen that recently - what else is on ... ch9 ...

 

[RooFlyer]

Just watched the ACI episode via the youtube link (thanks timster).

I'm not a pilot, or air 'technical' in any way, but having seen the 4 Corners episode, and read RdC's book, I think I'm a bit informed about what happened. I was a bit disappointed in the episode (lot of padding, not as much detail on the aircraft state), but I guess there wasn't really that much going on after the initial uncontained engine failure', except some calm decision making and actions in the coughpit!

Actually, this whole current series of ACI, often where there is no 'crash' and hence no going through the long, winding investigation afterwards I find a bit tedious - lots of pax dramatization. I'm not ghoulish about wanting to view 'crashes' but I do find the investigations very interesting.

 

[harvyk]

Will this show not die???

I just had lunch with some work mates... One of them mentioned that he'd seen the show last night, and was telling us about it... He was getting what happened on QF32, the AirNZ flight and the UA232 flight mixed up... He also thought that they where flying on only 1 engine at the end...

Seriously, I'd love to see the shows makers get hauled over coals for making something so inaccurate and poorly researched, considering there is no shortage of factual information available (eg ATSB or an actual A380 captain. Would it be nice if there was an internet forum available that you could ask actual A380 captains questions?) , it wouldn't have exactly been hard to do some research...

 

[fairbasa]

Re: Ask The Pilot.

ACI is generally quite a reasonable show. The recent 9 show was so appalling as to defy description.

I saw that CH9 Peter Overton special too and agree it was the worst most sensationalized piece of rubbish I've ever seen. They somehow tried to tie that A320 crash during an acceptance flight in France to AF447 to QF32 despite them all happening for totally different reasons. They made it sound like QF32 was purely as a result of some sort of catastrophic computer failure and almost failed to mention that it was actually a result of engine failure.

 

[anat0l]

Re: Ask The Pilot.

I saw that CH9 Peter Overton special too and agree it was the worst most sensationalized piece of rubbish I've ever seen. They somehow tried to tie that A320 crash during an acceptance flight in France to AF447 to QF32 despite them all happening for totally different reasons. They made it sound like QF32 was purely as a result of some sort of catastrophic computer failure and almost failed to mention that it was actually a result of engine failure.

I suppose no one wrote to 9 for actually screening that tripe?

 

[harvyk]

Re: Ask The Pilot.

I suppose no one wrote to 9 for actually screening that tripe?

OT but...

Why would ch9 actually care that they had gotten so many basic facts so badly wrong? Provided they didn't put anything in which they could get sued over, and provided that they actually get TV viewers (and lets face it, planes blowing up will tend to do that) they don't really care.

A bloke at work (who is not big on planes) watched the ch 9 version, and to him it was perfectly good viewing. No doubt by the time he hops onto his next flight, he'd have completely forgotten everything about the show except for the fact he'd watched it.

 

[anat0l]

Re: Ask The Pilot.

OT but...

Why would ch9 actually care that they had gotten so many basic facts so badly wrong? Provided they didn't put anything in which they could get sued over, and provided that they actually get TV viewers (and lets face it, planes blowing up will tend to do that) they don't really care.

A bloke at work (who is not big on planes) watched the ch 9 version, and to him it was perfectly good viewing. No doubt by the time he hops onto his next flight, he'd have completely forgotten everything about the show except for the fact he'd watched it.

I guess unless anyone at Ch 9 in the editing / programming executive actually had some morals and/or ethics (and even then), you're probably right. Moving on......

 

[D747]

Re: Ask The Pilot.

Why would ch9 actually care that they had gotten so many basic facts so badly wrong? Provided they didn't put anything in which they could get sued over, and provided that they actually get TV viewers (and lets face it, planes blowing up will tend to do that) they don't really care.

Never let the facts get in the way of a good story.

 

[Hvr]

Re: Ask The Pilot.

Basically I can buy a box of breakfast cereal and get a taxi licence whereas to get a pilot's licence there is rigorous testing at the beginning and all along their career.

Also, the person driving the taxi may or may not bear a resemblance to the photo on the licence displayed. I have far more confidence that my pilot (indeed whole crew) is who they say they are and that their colleagues would report it very quickly if they had any doubts.

Now as for the common sense of politicians well let's not even go there!

 

[Must...Fly!]

Re: Ask The Pilot.

I spend some time in the flight deck on most days - next time I should look on the dash for the little sign - "Your Captain today is ..."

 

[legroom]

Re: Ask The Pilot.

The Doctors you see in hospital working on your case do not carry licence on their neck, only an ID with their names - occasionally.

You would be a certified mental case if you demand to see Dr Smith's licence before allowing him/her to examine your child, reset your grandmother's broken ankle etc....

I see similarities here with pilots.

The whole environment is comprehensively vetted by the company and the pilots' colleagues.

The issue, if there is one, would be at the application stage where someone staged their life history and the company got sucked in believing that story - if ever.

But it did happen in medicine where occasionally some nutcase get through, mostly in peripheral cases where skill levels are not demanding (and therefore, less likely to be exposed for lack of skills).

I sincerely hope no one would be able to talk their way into a commercial coughpit.