Guest ^o_o^ Posted December 10, 2004 Share Posted December 10, 2004 I was stitting in my truck waiting for a flight I was to service, observed the China Airlines Boeing 747 registration B18205 power up 08R when it was at about Taxiway H down the runway I heard a loud explosion/bang, saw some reverse thrusters at about Taxiway E aircraft used entire runway to come to a halt. Pulled into taxiway D. Any speculations? Blown tire, or Engine Failure? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ^o_o^ Posted December 10, 2004 Share Posted December 10, 2004 Just saw Globe Tow Crew headed down, and brake fire was put out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanadaEH Posted December 10, 2004 Share Posted December 10, 2004 Global news "speculates" engine fire, although unconfirmed reports of bird strike. That'd be three bird strikes in YVR for China Airlines in the past year! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ^o_o^ Posted December 10, 2004 Share Posted December 10, 2004 Reliable source at globe, said (they) were told it was a "bird strike" and in other news: Unconfirmed reports indicate that CanadaEh sits in his car parked outside YVR with nothing else better to do, wireless laptop, airport scanner, binoculars out, and ExpressVu sattellite on CNN & Global......on his day off hehe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanadaEH Posted December 10, 2004 Share Posted December 10, 2004 haha, you saw me did you? Global TV showed a picture taken by an onlooker of a fire near or on the brakes. Or was that onlooker me? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ^o_o^ Posted December 11, 2004 Share Posted December 11, 2004 to be or not to be I didnt get a chance to sniff the engine for the KFC aroma, wonder if its been confirmed a bird strike yet. NEWS 1130 said bird strike as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ^o_o^ Posted December 12, 2004 Share Posted December 12, 2004 CBC British Columbia 747 aborts takeoff at YVR WebPosted Dec 10 2004 03:01 PM PST VANCOUVER - A China Airlines 747 jet hit a bird during its takeoff roll at Vancouver International Airport Friday morning, forcing the pilot to abort his takeoff. The bird was sucked into one of the plane's four engines, forcing the heavily loaded plane bound for Taiwan to make an emergency stop on the runway. An airport spokesperson says the jumbo jet's tires were smoking as it came to a halt on the runway. The plane was quickly surrounded by emergency crews, but there was no evacuation nor any injuries. The plane was towed back to the terminal, where the 375 passengers were able to disembark. China Airlines spokesperson Michael Lo says this is the airline's third aborted takeoff because of a bird in the past year at Vancouver International. "That's why we talk to the airport authority. We want to know what they have done." LINK: YVR Wildlife Management According to airport officials, 1.5 million birds were moved out of the way in 2003 using pyrotechnics, propane cannons, sirens and lights. And they say it's been working. There were 76 bird strikes last year, a drop of eight per cent from 2002. ** that is true, I remember them taking in an Eagle on take off, but didnt abort take-off. Did a loop, and landed again. I should call the SPCA and report them Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sustainable Posted December 12, 2004 Share Posted December 12, 2004 Its the new improved Archer Departure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GTFA Posted December 12, 2004 Share Posted December 12, 2004 Three birds for one airline in one year????? What are the odds of THAT happening? GTFA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ^o_o^ Posted December 12, 2004 Share Posted December 12, 2004 Considering there is a bird sanctuary located on the north side of Sea Island (Iona Beach Regional Park) I'd say the odds are pretty good. I wonder if China Airlines will voice their concern, over their third incident within a year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steam Driven Posted December 12, 2004 Share Posted December 12, 2004 Don't forget Reifel Island Bird Sancutary to the south as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GTFA Posted December 12, 2004 Share Posted December 12, 2004 Considering there is a bird sanctuary located on the north side of Sea Island (Iona Beach Regional Park) I'd say the odds are pretty good. I wonder if China Airlines will voice their concern, over their third incident within a year. I dunno. I have been operating out of this airport for many, many...many years and have NEVER "run afoul", so to speak. Maybe a few close calls. How on earth can anyone complain about the birds at an airport on the beach on the west coast of Canada right in the middle of migratory paths not to mention natural habitat of so many species large and small? It's like the folks in Burkeville complaining about airport noise. And why Dynasty, not anyone else? Or are there stats to show otherwise? GTFA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maverick Posted December 12, 2004 Share Posted December 12, 2004 It's like the folks in Burkeville complaining about airport noise. The residents of Burkeville were not complaining about the noise. They/we were rightly concerned about a 4 story building encroaching on their back yards and elementary school. YVR has absolutely oodles of undeveloped space and to force WestJet into that spot hints of hidden agenda. FWIW, Burkeville was exactly where it is now long before this place was a commercial airport. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GTFA Posted December 12, 2004 Share Posted December 12, 2004 Whatever, OK it's like community "X" next to airport "Y" complaining about the noise made by aircraft. Now back to the birds. GTFA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BoomerPete Posted December 12, 2004 Share Posted December 12, 2004 I have been operating out of this airport for many, many...many years and have NEVER "run afoul", so to speak. Maybe a few close calls. Neither have I, but.. How on earth can anyone complain about the birds at an airport on the beach on the west coast of Canada right in the middle of migratory paths not to mention natural habitat of so many species large and small? Pretty damn easily don't you think? If airplanes hit birds at YVR as often as it might seem, then either the bird sanctuary or the airport is in the wrong place, wouldn't you say? It's like the folks in Burkeville complaining about airport noise. Not even slightly! Noise isn't a safety issue, bird strikes are. Noise is a byproduct of airport operations, birdstrikes are a hinderance to safe airport operations. The airport authority should try to mitigate the inconvenience of noise, but it has an absolute responsibility to mitigate the safety risk of birdstrikes. And why Dynasty, not anyone else? Or are there stats to show otherwise? Does it matter at all? It's not like the birds are looking at the logos on the tails before deciding which aircraft to run into. Suggesting, even indirectly, that Dynasty somehow bears some fault for a bird problem at YVR is a joke. If they've had 3 rejects for bird strikes in the last year then that's how many times the airport operator has failed to provide a safe operating environment for them, not how many times they've foolishly run into birds on take-off compared to X,Y or AC airlines. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fido Posted December 12, 2004 Share Posted December 12, 2004 ....FWIW, Burkeville was exactly where it is now long before this place was a commercial airport. Trans Canada airlines made its first flight in 1937 from Sea Island to Seattle. Burkeville was a housing project to provide accommodations to the Boeing workers during WW2. Airport was there first. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.