jenny@nw
Veteran
For this round, I'll go north of the border and pick an electrical system problem in YYZ :cold:
Omaha
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
For this round, I'll go north of the border and pick an electrical system problem in YYZ :cold:
For the record, are we including Mesaba and/or pinnacle here, as you alluded too?NWA came real close at DFW last night with an RJ landing no flaps and really hot. First time I ever seen an RJ use every inch of 18R which happens to be 13,400'. Over ran the emergency crews.
So put me down for DFW.
For the record, are we including Mesaba and/or pinnacle here, as you alluded too?
http://www.clickondetroit.com/news/5447950/detail.html Still no report on this. 7 months already. How long can we accept "incomplete" as an excuse on the FAA data? THings are happening and not showing up.Yes, I realize public perception is what drives the financials behind the safety discussion, but I was actually trying to move away from the financial aspects of this (there's some irony, eh) and get more into the factual/statistical aspects surrounding safety. These are two entirely seperate conversations, unless, of course, the statistics prove that the public perception of safety (or lack thereof)is accurate.
This may all be moot, due to the high level of statistical unreliability when analyzing very infrequent events. I.E., if there are 16 events in one year and 18 in the next, is that really a trend when it's on a baseline of 450,000 departures. But, if the historical events are fairly stable (say 15-20 events per year) and the number of events doubles or triples, then that would definetely lend credence to the assertion that NWA is less safe than before, especially on a decreased flying level.
I was hoping for some dialogue on the completeness of the data in the FAA database, but, somewhat surprisingly to me, my interest in this is somehow seen as an affront. This is somewhat puzzling to me, considering the data will likely show an increase in incident frequency, and would thus provide a much more compelling argument than the current method of jumping on each event individually and proclaiming the sky is falling (or things are going to start falling from the sky).