Plane crash in South America

[Catholic_Lady]

With Brian being a pilot, this is my absolute greatest fear in the world. It hits so close to home every time I hear of a plane crash. I can't imagine what they went through during those last few minutes or seconds, or what their families are going through now. Absolutely horrifying. 

A chartered plane carrying 81 people, including members of a Brazilian soccer team that had made a stunning climb up the ranks at home, crashed on the outskirts of Medellín, Colombia, killing nearly everyone onboard, the authorities said early Tuesday.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/29/world/americas/plane-carrying-brazilian-soccer-team-crashes-in-colombia.html?_r=0

[Jesster]

Eek! Plane crashes are definitely frightening. As someone who was in aircraft maintenance, I can assure you that this is an absolutely rare occurrence. It's even far less likely to happen in the military because of the rigorous maintenance standards compared to the civilian world (I should know). Global news makes it seem far more common than it actually is because of the sample size.

[abaris]

With Brian being a pilot, this is my absolute greatest fear in the world. It hits so close to home every time I hear of a plane crash. I can't imagine what they went through during those last few minutes or seconds, or what their families are going through now. Absolutely horrifying. 

Just think of it that way. The risk of having an accident driving to the airport is far greater than the flight. I don't know the exact numbers right now, but the chances of being in a plane crash are incredibly slim. It's only that usually many people lose their lives at the same time that makes us take note.

[Minimalist]

Eek! Plane crashes are definitely frightening. As someone who was in aircraft maintenance, I can assure you that this is an absolutely rare occurrence. It's even far less likely to happen in the military because of the rigorous maintenance standards compared to the civilian world (I should know). Global news makes it seem far more common than it actually is because of the sample size.

That's not what they say.

http://www.ibtimes.com/us-military-ready...fy-2448087

The Air Force currently has about 1,600 combat aircraft, but the service is falling short of almost 700 pilots and 4,000 maintenance crew members. The report stated: “The lack of ability to fly and maintain [aircraft], especially in a high-tempo/threat combat environment, means that its usable inventory of such aircraft is actually much smaller.”

[vorlon13]

I've heard hints on the news the plane ran out of fuel.

So sad if true . . .

[Jesster]

Eek! Plane crashes are definitely frightening. As someone who was in aircraft maintenance, I can assure you that this is an absolutely rare occurrence. It's even far less likely to happen in the military because of the rigorous maintenance standards compared to the civilian world (I should know). Global news makes it seem far more common than it actually is because of the sample size.

That's not what they say.

http://www.ibtimes.com/us-military-ready...fy-2448087

The Air Force currently has about 1,600 combat aircraft, but the service is falling short of almost 700 pilots and 4,000 maintenance crew members. The report stated: “The lack of ability to fly and maintain [aircraft], especially in a high-tempo/threat combat environment, means that its usable inventory of such aircraft is actually much smaller.”

And how does that change what I said? Maintenance requirements on aircraft are far more strict in the military and inspections are done far more often. That was my job, Min. I know what I'm talking about.

Unless you meant the sample size thing. I wasn't using that as a comparison. I used that to state that plane crashes in general are less common than the news makes it seem.

[account_inactive]

Very sad.

[c172]

Yes, the team involved was Chapecoense, which is ninth in the Brasileirão (the top men's pro league in Brazil). It was a BAe 146 (for anybody who might be an aviation buff), which is a fairly small, quad-jet commuter plane that was widely used in the 80's (now it is used for firefighting). 

Hearing conflicting statements that is was a fuel or electrical problem, but I'd believe electrical. 

[Minimalist]

That's not what they say.

http://www.ibtimes.com/us-military-ready...fy-2448087

And how does that change what I said? Maintenance requirements on aircraft are far more strict in the military and inspections are done far more often. That was my job, Min. I know what I'm talking about.

Unless you meant the sample size thing. I wasn't using that as a comparison. I used that to state that plane crashes in general are less common than the news makes it seem.

What they are saying is that they are not meeting their own requirements.  Let's face it, we also have a lot of aging planes that probably should be junked - like the A10 - but which are kept in service because local politicians don't want to lose jobs in their districts.  Our military establishment seems to do everything except focus on defense.

The problem is not unknown.

http://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/a...craft.aspx

The U.S. military operates fleets of Cold War-era aircraft that will not be replaced any time soon. For the Pentagon, this creates daunting challenges, experts warn. Airplanes will have to fly much longer than planned and, at a time of tight budgets, the cost of maintaining aging equipment is projected to soar.

[Jesster]

And how does that change what I said? Maintenance requirements on aircraft are far more strict in the military and inspections are done far more often. That was my job, Min. I know what I'm talking about.

Unless you meant the sample size thing. I wasn't using that as a comparison. I used that to state that plane crashes in general are less common than the news makes it seem.

What they are saying is that they are not meeting their own requirements.  Let's face it, we also have a lot of aging planes that probably should be junked - like the A10 - but which are kept in service because local politicians don't want to lose jobs in their districts.  Our military establishment seems to do everything except focus on defense.

The problem is not unknown.

http://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/a...craft.aspx

The U.S. military operates fleets of Cold War-era aircraft that will not be replaced any time soon. For the Pentagon, this creates daunting challenges, experts warn. Airplanes will have to fly much longer than planned and, at a time of tight budgets, the cost of maintaining aging equipment is projected to soar.

Yes, I know the planes are aging. I personally worked on one of them (KC-135). Maintenance keeps up with them just fine compared to the civilian side, though. While the civilian end has newer planes in general, they aren't held to the same standards of maintenance. They wait far too long to do the periodical checks as well. You can keep an old plane running just fine as long as you keep up on the work, but not doing the same for a newer craft lets far too much slip by.

Please don't argue about this based on some magazine you read when, yet again, I worked in this exact field.