Ron5335 Posted July 21, 2014 Posted July 21, 2014 Journalism at it's Worst................... Chanel 7 news last night from Hugh Whitfield (On site reporter) I'm standing in what appears to be the remains of a baggage section of the plane, I can see many bags that have been opened and their contents spread out. I can see many mobile phone chargers, but no mobile phones,,They have appeared to have been taken !!!!!!!! Who packs their mobile phones in their bags ????????? You carry it on your person. Where do you you put your charger when you travel ??????? In your bag. But it makes more sensation than saying. I'm standing in what appears to be the remains of a baggage section of the plane, I can see many bags that have been opened and their contents spread out in an attempt to help identify the owners, but thing of value like mobile phone chargers are just laying about, Poor old Hugh (And his whole news team) must not realise that one is a bit useless without the other... And they wonder why wars start !!!!!!!!!!!! 6 2
Kenny Posted July 24, 2014 Posted July 24, 2014 I don't know if this has been posted already . I have cut and pasted it from an email so I hope it works From news reports the aircraft probably broke up shortly after the end of this video since the debris field was so large. This must have been a minute and a half of sheer terror for the passengers. Looks like the right engine and wing area took the hit. Note the camera operator is able to record the moment of impact in the first 2 seconds of this clip. Note the smoke burst left behind on impact with the #2 engine area. There is a 18 second delay (speed of sound delay) due to the distance and altitude of the explosion. Question: how did this video operator know to have his camera running just prior to the missile explosion? How many people run their camera in the sky looking for an airplane cruising at altitude so high that most are not visible to the human eye? Note that the pilots are maintaining wings level, the airplane and burning wing still intact, in what appears to be an uncontrolled descent from 33,000 feet when the video ends at 1+19sec. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DaQzMv89eeo Ken
yampy Posted July 24, 2014 Posted July 24, 2014 When I view the video , it shows it was uploaded 1 month ago ! .... 1
dutchroll Posted July 24, 2014 Posted July 24, 2014 Dutchroll - I'm sure you would know that Qantas loses money on many international routes so it isn't a matter of gifting treasures to your opponents when you are consistently losing money on them each day. Lol. Apologies for thread drift, but fact: Every single flight I do out of Singapore to Australia (SIN-PER, SIN-MEL, SIN-BNE, SIN-SYD) departs within a hour or so of a Jetstar flight to the same destination. A subsidiary low-cost no frills airline competing against its own mainline carrier on identical routes. Same for Sydney-Honolulu, which I have dozens of in my logbook. Every airline executive around the world, bar one particular individual (any guesses who that might be?), says that it's madness to compete your budget low cost carrier against your premium brand on the same routes at the same times. Fact (firsthand knowledge, not hearsay): the former manager at one of these international destinations tried to send an invoice for a million dollar ground handling/maintenance service contract to Jetstar, and had it returned to him with a message that the payment would be billed to the mainline carrier (Qantas International). He responded that no way, it is for the low cost carrier so it needs to be billed to them. He then received a message from a very senior manager in Sydney that he would do as he was told and send the invoice to the mainline carrier. Fact: I have sat in the cockpit of a Boeing 767 chock-a-block full of passengers waiting 20 minutes for a Brisbane gate to become available even though there was a serviceable, unoccupied one at the terminal right next to (literally the adjacent gate) our originally planned one which was occupied by a delayed aircraft. When I called on the radio to our company ports coordinator enquire why we couldn't use it, the answer was "sorry, that one is reserved for the low cost carrier and even though we have no scheduled arrivals on it, we have to pay them a massive amount of money out of the mainline international budget if we use it for a B767 turnaround" Fact: Line rectifications and engineering costs performed by Qantas International employed engineers on Jetstar A330s were billed under the QF international cost code (relayed to me by an engineer who had just been berated because he put the Jetstar cost code on the documentation for servicing their A330). And you wonder why Qantas International is losing money? It's because in many aspects they are paying for two airlines but only receiving the revenue from one. Remember, only a few years back before Jetstar came along and the QF share price went south, Qantas International was making billion dollar profits. What happened so suddenly? I can assure you my income hasn't changed much although I have forfeited some conditions of employment along the way so it's nothing to do with me getting a payrise! 1 3
SDQDI Posted July 24, 2014 Posted July 24, 2014 I don't know if this has been posted already . I have cut and pasted it from an email so I hope it worksFrom news reports the aircraft probably broke up shortly after the end of this video since the debris field was so large. This must have been a minute and a half of sheer terror for the passengers. Looks like the right engine and wing area took the hit. Note the camera operator is able to record the moment of impact in the first 2 seconds of this clip. Note the smoke burst left behind on impact with the #2 engine area. There is a 18 second delay (speed of sound delay) due to the distance and altitude of the explosion. Question: how did this video operator know to have his camera running just prior to the missile explosion? How many people run their camera in the sky looking for an airplane cruising at altitude so high that most are not visible to the human eye? Note that the pilots are maintaining wings level, the airplane and burning wing still intact, in what appears to be an uncontrolled descent from 33,000 feet when the video ends at 1+19sec. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DaQzMv89eeo Ken If you read the comments the poster explains it is NOT MH17 but a plane they shot down a few days before, not sure how true that is?
facthunter Posted July 25, 2014 Posted July 25, 2014 Dutchroll. Nick Xenophon was onto that. I know it is/was true . I would suggest it is an accounting fraud and a criminal act. How they get away with it beats me. Nev 2
AVOCET Posted July 25, 2014 Posted July 25, 2014 Dutchroll. Nick Xenophon was onto that. I know it is/was true . I would suggest it is an accounting fraud and a criminal act. How they get away with it beats me. Nev They all get caught sooner or later , Some one will blow the whistle 1
winsor68 Posted July 25, 2014 Posted July 25, 2014 The cost of Australia's airline shananigans will be due soon enough...it's the Australian public that will pay.... Currently it is the airline staff at lower levels who are "paying" the price. A few years ago pay and conditions for ground staff were regulated alongside safety and compliance...the entry of low cost carriers with "low cost" staff has seen a lot of monkeys enter the profession who are happy to get paid peanuts...as the more "conscientious" workers move into other fields...soon everyone will have forgotten exactly what it is they are there to do.
Gnarly Gnu Posted July 25, 2014 Posted July 25, 2014 Thanks Dutchroll, interesting & makes economic sense why they would prefer to shift profits away from Qantas which is in a government regulatory straightjacket to nowhere (not endorsing any potentially dodgy practices, just commenting on the economics). Never use Jetstar myself but thankful for the competition.... err against Qantas? Hmmm FT another advantage of democracy you enjoy is freedom of religion, here you are free to believe error. 1
2tonne Posted July 25, 2014 Posted July 25, 2014 Dutchroll, very interesting. Companies naturally like to maintain profitability in countries with favourable taxation (e.g., Singapore) while shifting costs back to countries with a higher tax rate (ie Australia). Unfortunately, some companies end up falling foul of the 'transfer pricing' rules and get slugged huge penalties. This is just a general comment btw - I am certainly not suggesting that any particular company is doing anything that would fall foul of the tax laws. 2
Phil Perry Posted July 25, 2014 Posted July 25, 2014 (actually I was always more worried about being shot down by the US Navy on that route, as they are no strangers to shooting down an airliner full of passengers with a surface-to-air missile). USA. Oh Dear Dutch,. . . . I take it you don't have much time for the septics,. . . .but they've only done it once,. . . . "THEY ARE NO STRANGERS" . . .??? Not an objective description really is it Dutch,. . .I always thought your posts were rounded, thoughtful and sensible up to now,. . . from the way you slanted that post . . . which is written to make the reader feel that the yanks do it all the time with gay abandon,. . . .it appears that you really don't like our American mates,. . .is there a hidden issue there ?? Don't expand if you really don't want to discuss your thinly disguised disdain of the Americans. I'd have thought a better and more mechanical explanation might have gone something like " THE AMERICAN NAVY SHOT DOWN AN IRANIAN AIRLINER DUE TO AN UNBELIEVALY EXTREME F**K UP in the identification of a radar target whilst the vessel in question was at maximum readiness in hotly disputed territorial waters and fully expecting a hostile attack from a well armed adversary. . ."( to whom they had already supplied military ordnance in previous years. . .! ) This was ( as far as I am aware ) a "One-off" ( Albeit unforgiveable ) and can therefore not really be used as a benchmark for repeat tragedies, especially when the reported circumstances ( MH 17 )are so somewhat different in detail, as the accused are, ( Possibly) inexperienced paramilitary personnel with very little training nor experience on the firing mechanics. . . Addendum,. . . . . Whilst I had only had my drivers license for 12 months, a little girl of 7 years ran out into the road in front of me and gave me no chance to brake,. . .I swerved my motorbike as much as possible to the right and fell of it in the process, but I failed to miss the little girl completely and spun her around like a little rag doll into the road. She suffered a broken arm and collar bone, plus cuts and bruises but fortunately survived the encounter. Do you think it would be fair to say at some time in the future that "I was no stranger to knocking little kids over with a motor vehicle". . . ? Would this be a fair statement ? I only did it once Guv. . . . . . Please don't 'ang me. . . . . Phil No offence intended by the way. . . . 1
yampy Posted July 26, 2014 Posted July 26, 2014 Well said Phil .... I recall the Iranian / American incident very clearly ... If i remember the Americans misidentified the target as a F14 Tomcat .. I also recall that the Americans were upfront and open to all investigations and transparent in all investigations , all which cannot be said about this last sad episode in Ukraine . BTW Phil , I'll be over " The Green " in October , hoping to fly one of those C42's again ..
Phil Perry Posted July 26, 2014 Posted July 26, 2014 Well said Phil .... I recall the Iranian / American incident very clearly ... If i remember the Americans misidentified the target as a F14 Tomcat .. I also recall that the Americans were upfront and open to all investigations and transparent in all investigations , all which cannot be said about this last sad episode in Ukraine .BTW Phil , I'll be over " The Green " in October , hoping to fly one of those C42's again .. OK Aer KID,. . . . . . Go and see Wilkesey, he's the main C42 guru at the Green, great bloke, and he'll check you out and point you in the general direction of our field at Otherton. Since our cafe lady retired a few months ago we now have a gorgeous young lass who has her own motorised butty bar, and we've conned her into bringing it to the field every Sunday, so if you fly in to see us on a saturdays,. . .you'll have to get a bacon butty at the control tower cafe before you set out ! ! ! WE are a fair distance from the green though,. . .I mean, in a C42 you'd be in the air for a good 17 minutes, so go to the loo before you fly. ( no controlled airspace enroute either !! ) If you've lost the mobile number, pM me and I'll pass it on. Please give me a ring when you get into the area, be nice to meet up. If you wanna look the field up on Goooooogle whatsit, we are just north of junction 12 on the M6 motorway on the East side of the road from Penkridge village. Quite easy to find. 52 42 496 / 002 05 563 on your satnav. . . . most of the contact details available on othertonairfield.co.uk Cheers Phil
Guest ozzie Posted July 26, 2014 Posted July 26, 2014 The US/ Iran incident could have easily been averted if someone had left the 'war room', went up on deck and visually identified the aircraft as it approached.
Geoff13 Posted July 26, 2014 Posted July 26, 2014 Ok so let me get this straight. A complete team of highly skilled high tech sailors in what they claimed at the time to be the best Navy in the world, kill a bunch of civilians and it is a fuckup. But let an unskilled farmer trying to fight for his personal rights in the middle of backwoods nowhere make the same mistake, and its murder. Yep I can see the logic of that. This is a war zone, you are not going to get free and unfettered access unless you are on the side in control at the time. Cheers Geoff 1
facthunter Posted July 26, 2014 Posted July 26, 2014 Yes . There is not too much love lost sometimes. Perhaps if we (HERE) were a bit more "REAL" we wouldn't look so... er.. DUMB. As IF Putin gives a stuff about what we think. How can we threaten him??. Unfortunately a mistake won't be admitted. The Ukraine leader did not think it was more the a disastrous mistake , and that should be something significant in all this. It should not happen of course. Little boys playing with big toys... We huff and puff and then expect co-operation. That's what confounds me. The role we should play is HONEST BROKER. By displaying integrity and fairness, as we have generally done in the past on the odd occasions.. Nev 1
dodo Posted July 26, 2014 Posted July 26, 2014 Ok so let me get this straight. A complete team of highly skilled high tech sailors in what they claimed at the time to be the best Navy in the world, kill a bunch of civilians and it is a fuckup. But let an unskilled farmer trying to fight for his personal rights in the middle of backwoods nowhere make the same mistake, and its murder. Yep I can see the logic of that. This is a war zone, you are not going to get free and unfettered access unless you are on the side in control at the time.Cheers Geoff If you can't be trusted with the dangerous toy, you shouldn’t be allowed near it. That applies both to the captain of the Vincennes and whoever fired the Buk. And someone out spotlighting with a rifle. In both cases, a false assumption seems to have been made - the ame false assumption: - Vincennes: it isn't relying on military radio frequencies, therefore it must be an enemy. - Buk: it didn't return a friendly military IFF, therefore it must be an enemy. - Spotlighter: it looked like a fox. Sorry about your cat. More similarities: - The Vincennes captain got a medal, and the president of the time showed his priorities by stating "I refuse to apologise for the United States!" - both shooters did not know that normal civil aviation was occurring in the area, and was quite normal - they both saw the entire area as a war zone (rightly or wrongly). I put in the example of the spotlighting shooter to show just how irresponsible it is to give dangerous toys to idiots. You wouldn't do, but nations do, occasionally. And the shooter would probably not deny responsibility. dodo
Ron5335 Posted July 26, 2014 Posted July 26, 2014 They might not have apologised for the incident, but they did pop a $61m cheque in a card & mailed if off to Iran., then they went on to perform a greater atrocity in 1991 with the Highway of Death but this time no cheque
jeffd Posted July 26, 2014 Posted July 26, 2014 well actually people i have just done some interesting reading on the internet(which never lies of course) and found the 8 minute footage of the media crews who went in and filmed the fella with the stuffed monkey ,during this film this fellow had actually placed this toy on some luggage took his hat off and made a christian cross with his hands aross his chest. b 4 that of course i also had believed he was being disrespectful.no of course that doesnt mean that the rebels aided by russian techs didnt shoot that aircraft down however i am yet to see the info provided by the american side regarding the missile launch so i will hav to try and search for that as well.also regarding the shooting down of that iranian airliner i also found some information stating that the navy ship was in iranian waters helping the iraq forces which was revealed at their enquiry by a high ranking member of their crew and apparently the aircraft black boxes showed the aircraft in iranian airspace ,climbing with all transponders etc going. i put this in not say there r any conspiracy theories out there about mh17 especially as peoples credit cards who were on board r being used who by ? however whoever is responsible it would be nice if the truth could just come out ,but yes i know i am probably just being a lit bit too optimistic 1
Teckair Posted July 26, 2014 Posted July 26, 2014 especially as peoples credit cards who were on board r being used who by ? Really? you can't work that out? Probably those awful Americans. 1
fly_tornado Posted July 26, 2014 Posted July 26, 2014 Watching insiders this morning discussing sending Australian personnel into the middle of the Ukraine countryside. Won't end well if the russians start shooting
turboplanner Posted July 27, 2014 Posted July 27, 2014 You must have missed the part of the story where there are negotiations going on with each of the combatants to ensure a sterile site.
fly_tornado Posted July 27, 2014 Posted July 27, 2014 Yes that's the bit that doesn't make any sense, if negotiations worked Russia wouldn't be in the Ukraine. I admire Aboot for exploiting this tragedy for political gain but why risk more lives when you aren't going to achieve anything. Russia handing over war criminals? 1
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now