Another 737 crashes, killing everyone on board

[chris]

In a space of a few short months, we've had another 737 crash, this time in Nigeria, killing all on board the plane. This follows a couple of other incidents, 1 in Greece (IIRC) and another in Indonesia.

Isn't this a good enough reason, along with the many deaths that have occured, to have this series of plane completely grounded until investigations have been finished?

[jtace]

I dunno any details but I'd say it depends on the circumstances, are these lack of proper maintinence or just true flaws in the plane? hmmm

[chris]

The last crash came from an airline which appears to have a relatively good safety record. Indeed, the airline was the choice of most West-African business travellers. This is the doomed plane, 5N-BFN:

http://www.airliners.net/open.file/856397/L/



Another thing, some 737's that are still flying are too old! These are not like Concordes with relatively few flight hours, but planes with lots of flight hours.

Paul Stoddart here wants to run a airline strictly for business travellers called OzJet, but looking at the planes, they are 737-200 - and those are very old, and exactly the same type as the one which recently crashed. The first 737-200 took to the air on August 8, 1967. The man won't get me on something that old.

OzJet obviously is feeling the pressure:
http://www.heraldsun.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5478,17023676%255E662,00.html

[chris]

Another incident involving the doomed plane:

"30 MAR 2005 Engine fire on takeoff causes grass fire at Kano
An engine fire on a departeding Boeing 737 caused grass on the Kano Airport, Nigeria to catch fire. The resulting bush fire caused serious damage to the transformers and electrical cables serving runway 24. The Bellview Airlines B737 5N-BFN landed safely back at Kano without injury to the 96 passengers and five crew members. (Vanguard) "


Seems this is the 97th loss of a Boeing 737-2L9. :eek: And the 6th worst accident involving this type of 737. :eek:

It also appears there have been 4 crashes this year involving this exact type of 737. First EX-037, then OB-1809-P (formerly ZS-SIA), PK-RIM and lastly 5N-BFN.

The following site paints a bleak picture:
http://aviation-safety.net/database/dblist.php?field=typecode&var=103-2%&cat=%1&sorteer=datekey&page=1

[FeZ]

argh I would not set foot on a plane by Stoddart, I rather "Fly Niki" :D

http://www.flyniki.com/home.php?lang=eng

[chris]

Ah, so Niki Lauda is behind that lot. :)

What is it about grumpy old F1 team-boss rejects also being involved in aviation. ;)

Ah well, at least Lauda's reign at Jaguar was somewhat less turbulent than Stoddart's at Minardi. ;)

[FeZ]

Dont forget that Lauda was 3 times world champion before he became a part-time team advisor/manager :D

[chris]

Yeah, I know that. ;)

[Frank N. O.]

My condolences, but regarding the plane, then it's becomming clear that airlines put aside safety checks and extend them to the insane level, and today anyone who blows the peverbial whistle are banned from the entire business forever, couldn't it also partly be lack of proper maintenence?
Although the high use for a plane of this age also could say something, specifically if the whole airframe was from that year and not just the design.

Frank

[Justin Martin]

The following site paints a bleak picture:
http://aviation-safety.net/database/...datekey&page=1
The problem is that that site doesn't take into account number of flights made, miles traveled, planes produced, etc. It is just a list of number of accidents.

To put that into perspective, there's only been what, two fatal crashes involving the Gee Bee R series? That doesn't make it a safe plane, since there were only three of the planes built...


http://www.airsafe.com/events/models/rate_mod.htm

This site takes into account the number of flights made. Each of the 737 models has a lower accident rate per million flights than the A300 and A310. I didn't calculate it, but the 737 accident rate appears to be about average...

Also, note that the 737's have made about three times as many flights as the A300/310/320 series planes combined. Which may go back to what you said about some 737's being too old, but that's not an issue with the 737, it's an issue with the airlines and the air safety regulations of the country they are being operated in.

[Wazza]

I really don't like 737-200s. They're so noisy, with long slimmer engines than seen on the later models.

As mentioned in papers following each of these crashes recently, it's been pointing to more 3rd world countries, and probably a lack of maintenance.

Also these clock up astronomical amounts of milage, but lots of short range stuff, so many take offs and landings. There's much more stress involved on the whole plane structure following 100, 2 hour trips, then a 747 with 20, 10 hour trips.

I would much rather fly on a new A320, or 737-800 on the smaller routes in NZ.

[chris]

I have little worry flying on a 737NG flown by reputable airlines, also A320's for that matter.

I wouldn't fly on the Airbus A310 or A300 though, those are too old. Our government here maintains a fleet of Boeing 707's (powered by screeching loud RR Conway engines), and I'd never ever fly on one of those for the age reason. But they also have 737NG aircraft and soon Airbus A330, so maybe the old 707's can be retired.