| | | |

Slovakia Plants Explosive on Dublin-bound Flight


Click to view full size photo at Airliners.net
Contact photographer Diego Ruiz De Vargas

What: Danube Wings Boeing 737-400 en route from Poprad/Tatry Slovakia to Dublin
Where: The entire flight
When: Jan 2nd 2010
Who: Number aboard not released
Why: A Slovakian agency decided to test their security by slipping 9 packages of explosives into innocent passengers’ luggage. Eight of those packages were found.

George’s Point of View

ONE of those packages—85 grams of RDX plastic explosive— made it all the way to the innocent Slovakian-Irish passenger’s HOUSE, where suddenly Irish forces evacuate their entire neighborhood (reportedly evacuating several apartment buildings and shutting down a couple of intersections) to retrieve that one package of live explosive from his apartment on Dorset Street. Stefan Gonda, a 49-year-old Slovak electrician working in Ireland, must have been really surprised at that knock on the door. On the other hand, maybe not, since he’s from Slovakia and may be used to such thoughtless, stupid, ridiculous, dangerous, psychotic behavior from his government.

How do they justify endangering a plane full of innocent passengers on a commercial jet? RDX is considered unstable–it can light without a detonator. What if there had been turbulence? What if the temperature had dropped to make the compound even more unstable?

One head has already rolled for this. The head of the Slovak border and foreign police Tibor Mako resigned. Was he the one responsible or did he throw himself on his sword? Is there more to this?

I find it difficult to believe that anyone would use real passengers as guinea pigs, put real explosives on an actual international flight. If Ireland has a legal chip on its shoulder the same way the US does, there’d be an International lawsuit pending.

The Slovokian ministry claims no one was endangered.

Excuse me?

85 grams of RDX plastic explosive aboard a plane. Irish forces evacuated the neighborhood to retrieve it…but hey, on a volatile oxygen pumped package like an airplane, no problem.

It’s hard to believe they call that branch of government “intelligence.” Talk about an oxymoron.

To include the featured image in your Twitter Card, please tap or click their icon a second time.

Similar Posts

  • | | | |

    Hawaii-bound United Airlines Flight Makes Emergency Landing in Los Angeles

    United Ailrines BoeingUnited Airlines flight 1296 en route from Los Angeles to Hawaii had to return and make an emergency landing at Los Angeles International Airport on May 10 due to the smell of smoke in the cabin and cockpit.

    The Boeing 757, with 149 passengers on board was flying over the Pacific Ocean when the odor was noticed in the plane.

    The plane made an uneventful emergency landing at 11:38 am. None of the passengers or crew members were injured.

    Maintenance crews are examining the plane.

    Some passengers said they experienced the scariest moments of their lives when they were told to keep their oxygen masks and life vests on. One of the passengers, Rebecca Elder said that the smoke was coming from both sides of the plane. She further said “We looked around the other passengers, everybody was very calm and really nice and helped each other out.”

    To include the featured image in your Twitter Card, please tap or click their icon a second time.
  • | | | | |

    Maintenance, Smoke Grounds UA Flight to Shanghai

    What: United Airlines Boeing 777 en route from Chicago to Shanghai
    Where: Winnipeg
    When: Oct 25, 2010 1:40 pm
    Who: 194 passengers
    Why: While en route, the plane developed smoke in the cabin. The nearest place to land a 777 (requiring a long runway) was Winnipeg, so the pilot diverted to Winnipeg and made a safe landing with emergency crews on standby on the tarmac. Monday afternoon, a UA crew was assessing the plane; but a replacement plan is scheduled to arrive Tuesday to take the passengers to Shanghai.

    George’s Point of View

    Sometimes it seems as if it takes an emergency for a plane to get maintenance.

    Airliners never stop; they land, unload passengers, cleanup, fuel up, load more passengers and they are off again.

    When do planes get maintenance? After they see smoke?

    It’s not just United.

    Look at our posts: Engine failures, engine fires, cracked windshields, no oil pressure, low air pressure, breaking landing gear, non-working nose gear, shredding tires, smokey cabins…

    When do they stop a plane long enough for it to truly get a little TLC?

    I knew a former navy mechanic who said he would never fly on a commercial plane. Before AND After every flight, the crew checks every plane from nose to tail, ensuring everything is in perfect working order. It seems like a commercial plane only gets a good once over once it’s too late.

    We don’t do that with our cars. You know once the car’s warning light comes on, it’s already too late, and damage has already happened. So we get timely oil changes, and basic care because every dollar spent on maintenance is a hundred dollars not spent on repair.

    Sure, flight 835 plane is getting a once over now, but for that to happen, a plane full of passengers had to be put at risk.

    To include the featured image in your Twitter Card, please tap or click their icon a second time.
  • | | | | |

    Qatar Airways Plane Returns to Hong Kong with Cracked Windshield

    Qatar Airways flight QR-817 had to return and make an emergency landing in Hong Kong, China, on December 30th.

    The Boeing 787-800 plane took off for Doha, Qatar, but had to return shortly afterwards after the crew noticed a cracked windshield.

    The plane landed back safely. All passengers and crew members remained unharmed.

    To include the featured image in your Twitter Card, please tap or click their icon a second time.
  • | | |

    Hazards of Winter: Another Ground Crew Death

    What: Turkish Airlines Airbus A340-300 from Istanbul Ataturk Turkey to Bangkok
    Where: Istanbul
    When: Jan 24th
    Who: assistant de-icer
    Why: After de-icing, the airplane’s wing hit the de-icing hydraulic lift, struck the vehicle’s operator and knocked the lift on the assistant who died on the scene.

    George’s Point of View

    De-icing isn’t something we normally think about. Not for planes. Maybe those of us who have wintered in Chicago or New York have considered it. Those of us who have had to get up extra early to scrape the outer skin of ice and snow off of the car, even those of us who have had the forethought to stack a layer of cardboard over the windshield to limit the ice buildup, who turn on the heat inside so the commute will be tolerable. But frankly, scraping the windshield with the ice scraper, or knocking snow off headlights–with a car, it is usually not that hazardous–albeit sometimes slippery. Obviously de-icing a plane is significantly more dangerous. After all, the instructions on the back of an ice scraper fit on the ice scraper.

    The aircraft ground anti-icing operations manual available from ICAO runs 37 pages and cost $25. So there are 37 pages worth of established procedures to follow.

    News of a death makes me remember the ground crew who is working out there de-icing the plane while the passengers sit inside, all warm and cosy. It’s cold out there; and dangerous. More dangerous than we think about, but maybe we should.

    It’s only by learning from our mistakes, in aviation, and in every other industry that we progress. It’s too late for these two ground crewmen, one in Calgary, one in Thailand. But it’s not too late for us to learn from our mistakes–if mistakes there were.

    It has been just over a month since another de-Icing crew member in Calgarydied on the job. In that case, it was a Servisair ground worker who fell out of a cherry picker.

    In this latest instance, we haven’t really heard much yet. We know that the death occurred in Thailand, and that it was snowing heavily. The investigation will reveal the details of what happened. Who was in the wrong place at the wrong time. If the operator or crewman weren’t following guidelines–or the flight crew. The investigation will reveal who acted carelessly, or if it was simply an accident, and the plane just following the path of least resistance.

    I respect winter.

    And I respect ground crews. They brave the elements, just to make plane travel just a little bit safer. When you think about it, it’s a little bit heroic, and maybe a little bit sad how the ground crew works on plane after plane. It’s a little bit like a pastry chef who makes delicacy after delicacy, but never gets to eat them himself. The ground crew stays behind when the plane soars away.

    To include the featured image in your Twitter Card, please tap or click their icon a second time.
  • | | | | | |

    Centurion Air Cargo Plane Drops Engine Cowl During Take off

    centurion-air-cargoCenturion Air Cargo flight GG-4852 had to return and make an emergency landing in Miami, Florida, on November 11th.

    The Boeing 747-400 plane departed for Amsterdam, Netherlands, but dropped an engine cowl during take off, prompting the crew to turn back.

    The plane landed uneventfully. Everyone aboard remained safe.

    To include the featured image in your Twitter Card, please tap or click their icon a second time.
  • | |

    Questioning Compliance and Public “solutions”

    I’m not an expert but there are aspects to this Lithium Ion battery story which concern me. I completely understand why these planes are grounded as this battery situation is examined, and applaud that solutions are being considered even as I write this. I cannot help but wonder what the actual time-frame will be. When I start wondering, I start asking —and quoting—the experts available to me and my company.

    The FAA maintains a database of Service Difficulty Reports (SDR’s) for US Registered airlines. There’s a long ignominious history recorded of fire and smoke events previously examined by the FAA in the unique category that the fires are hidden, i.e. in locations inaccessible or unknown to crew: mundane items the public never heard of–such as the built-in Halon 1301 trash receptacle extinguishers that failed to extinguish trash fires– were found and fixed or replaced. Battery ground cables have been known to arc (Northwest Airlines DC-10, March 1988), insulation blankets to burn (April of 1988, a Continental 737), overheated fluorescent light ballasts smoked (115 incidents way back in 1991).

    Here’s an example of why I am concerned:
    At least twenty-nine fires have been identified as being ignited by electrical short circuits in/from flammable acoustic blankets. One of these flammable circuit types that was identified back in a 1991 report is permitted in Boeing products until 2016.

    When the solution to the battery problem is determined, what time frame will the Airworthiness Directives require? Will compliance be to exchange, replace or modify the battery system or to put it off till later? ADs are issued with overly generous compliance times in years.

    Will a temporary measure be taken along with a compliance date set years from now?

    Regardless of whether the bottom-line business of aviation is wrestling with the expense of safety, a dicey potential fire starter component is a problem that should be addressed.

    If the Dreamliner is going to be in service for the next 40 years, an issue causing a component to cause a fire should not be covered with 40 years of bandaids. It should be fixed now.

    To include the featured image in your Twitter Card, please tap or click their icon a second time.