it's ok, they've also been allowing airlines to push back the frequency of safety checks and scheduled maintenance on their fleets. government regulation has been hampering the airline industry for long enough. i'm glad we're putting safety oversight back in the hands of private industry where it belongs.

Let's just divide this thing by zero.

Paging Apik0r0s and Zeio to thread 4808369, stat.

They bought their tickets, I say "Let them crash."

In scarier news, an Airbus almost went down again earlier today on the same route as the one this summer. Link (new window)

I fly the Beijing route over the pole on the 777 but with GE engines. Still I have wondered about ditching in the Arctic sea.

Nice to see the FAA following directions... me thinks they just dont want to delay more flights and rather have them land early instead...

Number of Boeing 777 hull losses since inception: 1
Number of those involving fatalities: 0
Number of Boeing 777s with Rolls-Royce engines delivered: Somewhere around 300? It's a lot.
Number of incidents involving fatalities on a Boeing 777: One, when some engine technician got too close to the engine during maintenance and was sucked in.
Number of years Boeing 777 has been operational: 14

Note that B-777's with GE engines are not affected, this not all B-777's suffer from this issue. For example, United and Continental 777s use the GE90 engines.

I'm glad I'm flying to England in a 777 in the cold of January.

volodya: I fly the Beijing route over the pole on the 777 but with GE engines. Still I have wondered about ditching in the Arctic sea.

Not to worry, global warming has turned the arctic into a bathtub.

considering that no fatalities, or hull losses, have resulted from this condition - and it appears to have rather simply ways of preventing it - i see no problem with this

anti-government and scaremongering (wait.. that's redundant) in one headline

way to go dumbitter

Kazan: anti-government and scaremongering (wait.. that's redundant) in one headline

That sounds like a winner headline to me!


/Successful TrollMitter is successful!

Kazan: considering that no fatalities, or hull losses, have resulted from this condition - and it appears to have rather simply ways of preventing it - i see no problem with this

Kazan, this investigation is a direct result of the British Airways Heathrow crash.

(Note that not all of British Airways' 777s use Rolls-Royce engines.)

jph: Kazan: considering that no fatalities, or hull losses, have resulted from this condition - and it appears to have rather simply ways of preventing it - i see no problem with this

Kazan, this investigation is a direct result of the British Airways Heathrow crash.

(Note that not all of British Airways' 777s use Rolls-Royce engines.)

British Airways flight came up short of the runway at London's Heathrow Airport in January 2008, injuring 13 people.

notice I didn't say nobody was injured, I said nobody was killed. Neither did I say there wasn't a problem.

I did say that it appears that it is not difficult for the pilots to have a routine in flight to prevent icing induced shutdown.

I thought the 777 only had GE engines. I've been on the NY-HK over the pole flight a bunch of times on those. Pretty much from Halifax to northern China is no mans land. Anything goes wrong there, you're a goner.

Charlie Freak: Let's just divide this thing by zero.

Paging Apik0r0s and Zeio to thread 4808369, stat.

What? They're not here yet? they better upgrade to BBs and throw those pagers out.

TFA flew right over my head.

As a libertarian, I perform all my own aircraft safety inspections before flying.

John Madden will have the last laugh on all of us.

jph: Number of Boeing 777 hull losses since inception: 1
Number of those involving fatalities: 0
Number of Boeing 777s with Rolls-Royce engines delivered: Somewhere around 300? It's a lot.
Number of incidents involving fatalities on a Boeing 777: One, when some engine technician got too close to the engine during maintenance and was sucked in.
Number of years Boeing 777 has been operational: 14

Thank you. Farking hell.

lunchinlewis: In scarier news, an Airbus almost went down again earlier today on the same route as the one this summer. Link (new window)

Boy, that route sucks.

FlyPanAm: Boy, that route sucks.

4 bad turbulence events in the last two weeks. Maybe it's that big island shrouded in fog with the big ape on it.

jaytkay: As a libertarian, I perform all my own aircraft safety inspections before flying.


I do that too....right before boarding the plane, I thump my fist on the outside of the fuselage.

/It's the same way I check the quality of watermelons.

This is why I don't fly. I'm sick of having to sit near to people who freak out over every little bump and noise.

Once on a flight from Atlanta to Minneapolis, I was sitting in front of a couple who looked to be in their forties. As we were approaching the airport, there was a grinding noise, followed by a *woosh* and then a couple of light thuds.

The woman behind me went into hysterics "We're all going to die!!" Her husband told her to relax, it's just the landing gear locking into place.

"Landing gear? Why do they need that?"

I turned around and said "Because I would much rather have the airplane land on its wheels than go thorough a belly landing that would involve copious amounts of jet-fuel, flames, and the possibility of an exploding airplane."

The woman looked confused and then horrified, but spent the rest of the flight in silence. The husband turned beet-red for a moment before bursting out laughing.

The flight attendant looked like she wanted to scold me about talking about such things on an airplane but couldn't because she was trying not to laugh.

\Was 17 at the time.
\\Pre 9/11

wage0048: I turned around and said "Because I would much rather have the airplane land on its wheels than go thorough a belly landing that would involve copious amounts of jet-fuel, flames, and the possibility of an exploding airplane."

It probably wouldn't explode; but your luggage would be crushed.

Given that every person who has boarded a 777 in the 14 freakin years has arrived at their destination including the people on the Heathrow jet (albeit somewhat less refreshed than most) I think the odds are pretty good.

It also helps when there isn't a bunch of water in the fuel, although the problem can still occur due to condesate.

Kazan: jph: Kazan: considering that no fatalities, or hull losses, have resulted from this condition - and it appears to have rather simply ways of preventing it - i see no problem with this

Kazan, this investigation is a direct result of the British Airways Heathrow crash.

(Note that not all of British Airways' 777s use Rolls-Royce engines.)

British Airways flight came up short of the runway at London's Heathrow Airport in January 2008, injuring 13 people.

notice I didn't say nobody was injured, I said nobody was killed. Neither did I say there wasn't a problem.

I did say that it appears that it is not difficult for the pilots to have a routine in flight to prevent icing induced shutdown.

No, you said there hadn't been fatalities or hull losses. The Heathrow crash was a hull loss.

Airlines have a vested interest in delivering passengers safely to their destination. Bad for ticket sales to not do so.

Pilots may refuse - are obliged to refuse, actually - to fly any plane they deem unfit. Except for that one Egpytian pilot several years ago, pilots want just as badly to land safely as you do.

Add that to what jph posted, I don't see a problem here.

wage0048: This is why I don't fly. I'm sick of having to sit near to people who freak out over every little bump and noise.

Once on a flight from Atlanta to Minneapolis, I was sitting in front of a couple who looked to be in their forties. As we were approaching the airport, there was a grinding noise, followed by a *woosh* and then a couple of light thuds.

The woman behind me went into hysterics "We're all going to die!!" Her husband told her to relax, it's just the landing gear locking into place.

"Landing gear? Why do they need that?"

I turned around and said "Because I would much rather have the airplane land on its wheels than go thorough a belly landing that would involve copious amounts of jet-fuel, flames, and the possibility of an exploding airplane."

The woman looked confused and then horrified, but spent the rest of the flight in silence. The husband turned beet-red for a moment before bursting out laughing.

The flight attendant looked like she wanted to scold me about talking about such things on an airplane but couldn't because she was trying not to laugh.

\Was 17 at the time.
\\Pre 9/11

I'm like that woman. Luckily for my fellow passengers I take 2 Xanax and get drunk before every flight, so I'm asleep before we even take off.

TFA: According to the report, ice-induced shutdowns are rare - only three reported incidents over millions of flights.

Step 1 - Ignore that a "warning" can be a glorified FYI.
Step 2 - Ignore that "risk" can mean the odds are MUCH less than 1.
Step 3 - Ignore more cost-effective countermeasures that don't involve prohibitive cost and time.
Step 4 - If we don't heed the warning, we'll all die for sure! EVERYBODY PANIC!!

subby and the mod who greenlighted this turd of a headline, you are both idiotic assholes.

wage0048: This is why I don't fly. I'm sick of having to sit near to people who freak out over every little bump and noise.


I've been flying for 30 years and have never seen/heard anyone freak out over anything except for one delay-related incident. I think you can go back to flying.

Welcome to Obama's America, libtards!

wage0048: This is why I don't fly. I'm sick of having to sit near to people who freak out over every little bump and noise.

Once on a flight from Atlanta to Minneapolis, I was sitting in front of a couple who looked to be in their forties. As we were approaching the airport, there was a grinding noise, followed by a *woosh* and then a couple of light thuds.

The woman behind me went into hysterics "We're all going to die!!" Her husband told her to relax, it's just the landing gear locking into place.

"Landing gear? Why do they need that?"

I turned around and said "Because I would much rather have the airplane land on its wheels than go thorough a belly landing that would involve copious amounts of jet-fuel, flames, and the possibility of an exploding airplane."

Not to mention it takes a lot more power to taxi to the loading ramp.

dragonchild: TFA: According to the report, ice-induced shutdowns are rare - only three reported incidents over millions of flights.

Step 1 - Ignore that a "warning" can be a glorified FYI.
Step 2 - Ignore that "risk" can mean the odds are MUCH less than 1.
Step 3 - Ignore more cost-effective countermeasures that don't involve prohibitive cost and time.
Step 4 - If we don't heed the warning, we'll all die for sure! EVERYBODY PANIC!!

subby and the mod who greenlighted this turd of a headline, you are both idiotic assholes.

I think somebody is gonna be getting a timeout.

sboyle1020: I think somebody is gonna be getting a timeout.

Can we make backseat moderating a timeout-able offense? That's high on my "when I take over the world" list.

I'm a bit more concerned about the e.coli laced ice inside the plane.

Statistically, it's a much greater risk.

digitalyeti: Note that B-777's with GE engines are not affected, this not all B-777's suffer from this issue. For example, United and Continental 777s use the GE90 engines.

Came here to say that.

Good jorb, troll-mitter.

wage0048: This is why I don't fly. I'm sick of having to sit near to people who freak out over every little bump and noise.

Once on a flight from Atlanta to Minneapolis, I was sitting in front of a couple who looked to be in their forties. As we were approaching the airport, there was a grinding noise, followed by a *woosh* and then a couple of light thuds.

The woman behind me went into hysterics "We're all going to die!!" Her husband told her to relax, it's just the landing gear locking into place.

"Landing gear? Why do they need that?"

I turned around and said "Because I would much rather have the airplane land on its wheels than go thorough a belly landing that would involve copious amounts of jet-fuel, flames, and the possibility of an exploding airplane."

The woman looked confused and then horrified, but spent the rest of the flight in silence. The husband turned beet-red for a moment before bursting out laughing.

The flight attendant looked like she wanted to scold me about talking about such things on an airplane but couldn't because she was trying not to laugh.

\Was 17 at the time.
\\Pre 9/11

If that actually happened, I'm pretty sure it was in your head.

UNAUTHORIZED FINGER: wage0048: This is why I don't fly. I'm sick of having to sit near to people who freak out over every little bump and noise.

Once on a flight from Atlanta to Minneapolis, I was sitting in front of a couple who looked to be in their forties. As we were approaching the airport, there was a grinding noise, followed by a *woosh* and then a couple of light thuds.

The woman behind me went into hysterics "We're all going to die!!" Her husband told her to relax, it's just the landing gear locking into place.

"Landing gear? Why do they need that?"

I turned around and said "Because I would much rather have the airplane land on its wheels than go thorough a belly landing that would involve copious amounts of jet-fuel, flames, and the possibility of an exploding airplane."

Not to mention it takes a lot more power to taxi to the loading ramp.

On the other hand, assuming that the airplane isn't actually on fire, I'll bet those big inflatable slides are kinda fun.

sboyle1020: I'm like that woman. Luckily for my fellow passengers I take 2 Xanax and get drunk before every flight, so I'm asleep before we even take off.

I actually enjoy flying (except the boring parts between takeoff and landing). I used to love being able to listen in to the ATC radio traffic when I was a kid.

Abox: I've been flying for 30 years and have never seen/heard anyone freak out over anything except for one delay-related incident. I think you can go back to flying.

That happened to one of the "adults" that was accompanying the same trip. She was convinced that our 2-hr delay in landing in Atlanta would cause us to miss our connecting flight (we were supposed to have a 3-hr layover). She didn't seem to realize that the storm that was preventing us from landing was also likely preventing aircraft from taking off. In addition, I'd bet that the connecting aircraft wasn't going to be sitting on the ground at the Hartsfield-Jackson airport for 3 hours between flights. It was probably in line to land somewhere behind (or above) us.

TsukasaK: sboyle1020: I think somebody is gonna be getting a timeout.

Can we make backseat moderating a timeout-able offense? That's high on my "when I take over the world" list.

Are you referring to my comment or his?

Came for airbus/scarebus copypasta, leaving saddened.

Hey, all of you who think NOT grounding the planes was stupid:

What's in your background that allows you to perform the complex risk assessment required to come to that conclusion?

Yeah, thought so.

Much as you would like a black and white world, where EVERY plane gets grounded for any POSSIBLE problem, and you completely ignore the possibly massive financial impact - ain't gonna happen, sorry.

yogaFLAME: Came for airbus/scarebus copypasta, leaving saddened.

Airbus / Scarebus continues its ritual un-prosecuted pre-meditated killing of passengers world wide. From forcing tsunami destroyed countries to buy Scarebus to get aid, to failing the A380 150% wing-loading test, Scarebus builds on its reputation for falling out of the sky. FL35, cruise and it "breaks up". Nice. Good planes.

/Must I do everything?

mortimer_ford: yogaFLAME: Came for airbus/scarebus copypasta, leaving saddened.

Bastard.

Some of these comments are precious. Ntsb.gov is your friend. It should be known that no one was ever sucked into a 777 engine.

http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?ev_id=20010918X01956&key=1
~D

I'll take my chances with having a systems failure any day over the certainty that I will be stuck on a plane with a screaming child or a drunk. I am, of course, speaking of my own family.

Anyway, just don't ground it with me and my drunk screaming horde on board.

The FAA's mandate isn't to protect airline/air passenger safety. It's to protect the airline industry as a whole, and has been for at least 30 years.

See: outdated ATC infrastructure, lax enforcement of safety regulations, bending to the wishes of the ATA on the subjects proposed legislation that would require airlines to spend money on safety...

/go get your own [citation], damn kids these days want everything handed to them...
//mumble, mumble off my lawn, mumble-mumble

digitalyeti: Note that B-777's with GE engines are not affected, this not all B-777's suffer from this issue. For example, United and Continental 777s use the GE90 engines.

thanks for this info, I'm flying a UA 777 for christmas