From Routine To DISASTER | The Mystery of Turkish Airlines Flight 1951
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 29 เม.ย. 2023
- This air crash investigation looks at Turkish Airlines Flight 1951 a routine passenger flight flying from Turkey to the Netherlands. What was not known to the passengers or the crew was that this routine flight was going to lead to disaster. This video will uncover the reason how this could have happened!
Channel Merchandise - curiouspilot.myshopify.com
Final Report: reports.aviation-safety.net/2...
Turkish Airlines Livery for X plane by Devirex.
forums.x-plane.org/index.php?...
![ความรักของยักษ์เขียว (ทศกัณฐ์) - เดี่ยว ไออุ่น [OFFICIAL MUSICVIDEO 4K]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/yCCy-QVHqK8/mqdefault.jpg)
You make the best aviation vids in my opinion. You explain the systems so that anyone can understand them. Keep up the good work.
That’s great! Thank you so much.
@@CuriousPilot90 of course. Keep em coming. I've never flown anything bigger than a Cherokee 160. But I'm fascinated with airliners. Airbus in particular.
@@CuriousPilot90 can't you afford actors we want to hear the backstory so that when people die it's more dramatic these videos are bulshit . You must understand I come from a country that's never killed anybody with an airline so I look forward to seeing this sort of drama
So a botched repair leads to tragedy and Boeing not acknowledging the fact, hardly surprising. Pilots are meant to fly planes not be techies who know what exact information each critical sensor relies on. This one has the boeing lawyers working overdrive to get them out of this 1
Quite....
So the pilots, who KNEW before taking off that the pilot's altimeter of this plane had a troublesome history and despite being swapped out didn't work properly, decided that they could ignore it and it had disastrous consequences.
Pilots are meant to be professionals, so they should either have refused to fly the plane, or they should have taken that faulty altimeter into account and set up their plane for landing much sooner, so they could work around that failing altimeter during the landing.
Quite to the contrary they were still setting up the plane for landing and NO pilot flew the plane, which is opposite to all pilot training. Training clearly states that one pilot should be setting up the plane for landing, while the other pilot should be monitoring the screens/dials and be ready to take over control at any moment.
This one has incompetent pilots written all over it.
@@tjroelsmawhile that is correct, I'm pretty sure this was during a time where the consequences of the faulty radio altimeter on the captain's instrument panel was not known.
If it was known that the autothrottle primarily used the captain's radio altimeter, the crew could have taken more consideration into the approach.
Aircraft can dispatch with a faulty radio altimeter and even if it fails mid air, it shouldn't be a problem.
@@nik.6845 Even if they didn't know the consequences that faulty altimeter had, they should never have left setting up their plane for landing that late.
Schiphol is known for its steep glide-slope and the extra pressure that puts on the pilots, so you want to fully concentrate on flying/monitoring the plane instead of still setting up the plane.
The investigation of the black-boxes showed that the engines were at idle for almost 90 seconds during the approach because the auto-throttle used the faulty altimeter as reference and that the speed kept dropping, which is simply something the pilots never should have allowed to happen. The displays even showed that the plane was going into a special mode, if my memory is correct something like *** retard mode, because the autopilot thought the plane was already on the ground.
You can get away with it in a prop-plane because of the near instantaneous powering up of that type of engine, but jet engines take time to spool up, especially from idle.
So although technically speaking the faulty altimeter caused the accident to happen, in reality it was the pilots who were too late setting up their plane and failed to monitor or "fly" the plane.
@@tjroelsma Yeah unfortunately that is true. It can be pointed that the pilots not identifying the thrust levers retarding can be seen as pilot error.
I was right behind these guys. I could see on the TCAS that things were too tight. Turkish was #1, a Transavia was #2 and we were #3. The Turk crashed, Transavia went around, and I thought 'We're in'. Not so, we were also sent around. Schipol ATC were a bit too slick. Flyer 78A speaks. During our GA, ATC asked "did you see wreakage"....😳
Any educated pilot would be able to spell 'wreckage'
@@WelovedaxiesI know a few very experienced ATPLs whose spelling and grammar is not necessarily that great! Not an essential requirement for safe aviating…
@@robertcronk2451 Look at the guys channel he is quite obviously not a pilot
I was also there between you two in a Jetpack (you didnt see me)
In addition to given information, Boeing and Turkish airlines made a non-disclosed deal in 2010. Turkish airlines bought 35 737s, 737-800 and 737-900ER with huge discount. According to the CEO of Turkish airlines at the time, Boeing didn't want to discount a lot but after their pressure they had to accept it, calling the deal ''Cheapest planes we've ever sold to anybody''! It makes you question how much fault Boeing actually had, isn't it? Airliner business had too much corruption and sadly we learned about it with more crashes, while the worst part even today it isn't entirely gone...
Huh, I watched a few of your vids without seeing your sub count. Figured you were bigger given the quality!
Subbed, hope you grow man!
Ohhh, the "pause" visual and audio effect in the middle of the video is super cool! 👍
Ahaha, I was pretty proud of how that came out, lol. I’m learning as I go with video editing. I knew what I wanted to create and it came pretty close. 😁
My favourite air crash investigation channel on here- thanks again for another brilliant video!
Very kind of you, thank you.
Wow. This one is a real head scratcher. You untangle the maze with eloquent poise. 😎♥️
I found this one particularly interesting.
Always a good day when you post. Great job man
Thank you, glad you like them!
Great video! Thanks so much for your hard work :)
Thank you so much @xYuki91x
That’s very kind of you and much appreciated.
Recently discovered this channel. Great work and explanations of aircraft accidents. I've seen other channels about this flight and this one is the best.
Thank you Joseph.
i just came across this channel for the first time, impressive presentation !!!
Thank you, there’s plenty more for you to check out 😁
I appreciate your efforts. And this format is excellent. Keep making videos like this
Thank you Nik
Wow, you gained quite a number of followers, didn't you? I'm happy for you! You really deserve the attention with your fantastic work! ☺
Thank you, that’s nice to hear! I hope it continues, I’d like to continue making these videos :)
Good, informative and well-explained video. Thanks.
Fantastic video, I love how we experienced it the same as the crew before seeing what they didn’t know was happening. I also checked out the shop, the stuff looks great!
Thank you, I’m glad you found it interesting.
I love your videos !
It is so sad that lives were lost due to a known technical flaw that could easily have been overridden by the pilot. Seriously astounded by this. A fully flyable plane giving grossly erroneous warnings the entire cockpit knew were in error. Three experienced pilots were sufficiently confused by this to fly the plane right into the ground.
Experience in flying normal conditions does not translate into experience in handling emergencies/anomalies. When we are under stress or duress, our brains kinda go into primitive mode, sort of fight or flight, and cognitive abilities such as problem solving deteriorate. This is why it's important for airlines to have regular simulation training for various scenarios, certainly for stall recovery. Clearly Turkish Airlines realized this after the fact and incorporated additional training. I work in an industrial field where there is always potential for incidents, so to prepare people and have "muscle memory" on how to respond during a certain scenarios, we do drills twice a year. You would be surprised how repetitive "boring" emergency training kicks in during an actual emergency without having to think about it, you're just on auto-pilot, no pun intended.
How did this happened? Simple. There are pilots and there are system operators. Never mistake one for the other.
Don't rush to blame pilots because Boeing and Turkish airlines made a non-disclosed deal in 2010. Turkish airlines bought 35 737s, 737-800 and 737-900ER with huge discount. According to the CEO of Turkish airlines at the time, Boeing didn't want to discount a lot but after their pressure they had to accept it, calling the deal ''Cheapest planes we've ever sold to anybody''! It makes you question how much fault Boeing actually had, isn't it? Airliner business had too much corruption and sadly we learned about it with more crashes! I think that captain didn't cause the crash like you wrongly claimed rather saved over 100 people from a crippled plane...
@@ggoddkkiller1342 pilots have committed several clear gross mistakes no one can deny. Mistakes that have definitely been the ultimate cause of the incident. Are you a qualified professional to judge such a technical event? I hope not. If you are not an airline pilot i would suggest you step aside, listen, and let the professionals talk.
@@krusty1974 Yep, ''the professional talk'' lets listen what it says:
malfunctioning auto-throttle idles engines while it didn't even supposed to get input from faulty sensor and without slightest warning = quote quote ''gross mistakes''
Are you sure you didn't mean gross mistakes of Boeing, huh?? The fact they sold THIRTY FIVE aircraft to have a deal with Turkish airlines tells how much of fault Boeing had indeed while you somehow disregard it entirely and blame it on pilots with decades of experience and even go as far as insulting them even if they died trying to save the plane! The worst of all they were flying with heavy system control simply because it is airline protocol same as all airlines out there!! I really really doubt you ''the professional'' are actually a pilot otherwise you would know better for sure...
@@ggoddkkiller1342 i have 35 years of experience, 6 Type Ratings, 8 Airlines, Instructor. 20.000hours. Currently Captain on both Boeing 777 and 787. You are just someone who has not the faintest clue of what he is talking about. So much so that you don’t even realize the immense size of your ignorance. Unfortunately you’r also enough arrogant to believe you can understand something so technical you have zero knowledge about. That’s ok. But i have no more time to waste. P.S. pilots exist to fix situation not to be killed by them. These morons ignored obvious clues and they failed miserably in their most essential role. They are 100% guilty of the incident. End of the story. Go back to flight simulator where you belong.
💯
Great video.
I was obsessed with flight 447 Air France from Brazil to Paris what a tragedy and horror
Interesting how pilots who do not depend upon computers to fly are more cognizant of speed altitude and direction.
This wouldn't have happened without the computers. But they're here to stay.
You obviously like showing positive feedback from your viewers so i will add one more,well done. So hard to believe that the aircraft would act against the best interests of the safe landing of an aircraft. There is no way you could fault the pilots on this tragic accident.
Schrödinger's speedbreak: both armed and not armed at the same time, you need to open the box to find out.
Haha love this.
They shouldn’t have opened the box…
A plane in my country.
For short what happened:
The plane was going from Instanbul to Amsterdam in 25 February 2009 a Boeing 737-800 just before landing the altimeter showed -8 feet (-2.4KM) The aircraft lost controls and the only thing they can rely on was the autopilot. Eventaully it stalled and crashed just 2 miles away from runway 18R/36L. Out of 135 people only 9 died and 120 got injured and 6 people were not injured. The reason why it didnt explode is beacuse it crashed to a soft grass and beacuse the fuel was also low making it chop into 3 pieces just like other ones such as Asiana flight 214.
Reminder to pilots: dont forget speed, altitude and direction.
What you have said was all true but… may I suggest you read Sidney Dekker’s analysis of this event. It was commissioned by the OVV, the Dutch investigators. It touches on many of the human elements of this accident. What it didn’t address was the training, function duties of the third cockpit crew member. The ridiculous way autopilots will remain engaged on an ILS even though the speed is well below that bugged. The two different methods RETD can be annunciated and local of documentation was addressed but little was made of it. Finally the “sucker trap” of training a highly competent, well above average military pilot. I have flown with many and they unintentionally goad you into relaxing because their flying so good. In this case, the slow spool-up of the engines - the almost maximum pitch trim position - the useless of a third cockpit member - undocumented effects of RADALT 1 failures - Intercept of a glide slope from above - ambiguous RETD mode combined to crash a perfectly good airliner.
I’ll take a look, that sounds really interesting.
Don't rush to blame pilots because Boeing and Turkish airlines made a non-disclosed deal in 2010. Turkish airlines bought 35 737s, 737-800 and 737-900ER with huge discount. According to the CEO of Turkish airlines at the time, Boeing didn't want to discount a lot but after their pressure they had to accept it, calling the deal ''Cheapest planes we've ever sold to anybody''! It makes you question how much fault Boeing actually had, isn't it? Airliner business had too much corruption and sadly we learned about it with more crashes! I think that captain didn't cause the crash like you wrongly claimed rather saved over 100 people from a crippled plane...
@@ggoddkkiller1342he wasn’t blaming them, he was explaining human failings and errors. Blame is for children, grow up
@@M_SC If I made the rules, the sterile cockpit rule would include no communication with ATC during final approach, except in extreme emergency.
The pilot monitoring, should pay full attention to airspeed and throttle settings during this busy period.
The pilot flying should be trained that in a situation such as on this video, If the stick shaker activates, NEVER to change the approach slope at this stage of landing. Attempting to pull up or further down will both prove fatal, but the speed brake should be deactivated. Once the aircraft stabilises a go around may then be necessary.
Far too many accidents have been caused by lack of concentration by BOTH pilots during landing.
@@wilsjanegood point
Here’s one for you, it’s not a crash but an emergency landing with an interesting story attached: the Mallow Racecourse Incident. Captain Ocaña and his crew ended up in Cork for 39 days after their emergency landing, a temporary airstrip was built, they became local celebrities and 40 years later Ocaña Fest was created to celebrate the dramatic entrance at Mallow. Plane registration XA-FOU, there’s footage from that time of the Captain giving interviews and when the plane eventually takes off.
One of those feel good interesting stories you might like!
Bless these angles who entered heaven.
Thanks
Thank you so much. It’s really amazing of you to support the channel and something that is greatly appreciated.
@@CuriousPilot90
Well, I appreciate your channel very much! All the best for the future!
can the altimeter be switched off or reset buttion (sorry; using computer language) but wondering how tactile it feels to be a pilot with altimeter issue/situation
There needs to be a warning system for flying too slow before the stick shaker activates. This would give more reaction time.
The stick shaker is the warning you are flying too slowly. It activates at minimum of 3% above the 1g stall speed. Typically though it will activate at about 10 kts above Vs. In this case, they did know they were flying too slowly. Unfortunately the FO, being unfamiliar with an autothrottle and flight modes probably didn’t realise that the throttle would close because of engaged mode after he pushed the manually throttles up.
@@Trevor_Austincan you explain that in non pilot terms
I guess I don’t fully understand the role of the 3rd “safety crew” pilot in the cabin. Certainly seems like his role would be to help address these issues & manage the crises presented instead of what seemingly was a heavy workload amongst the captain & FO that distracted them from flying the plane.
3rd "safety crew"- you mean the check pilot his job is ensure the safety of the operation while the first officer is in training. They don't normally have the check pilot and you have to say while he can't cognizant of all the systems status he should have been aware of the thrust lever position failing to respond to the captain's actions. It is pretty poor design in 737 that pilots actions that takes the thrust outside of the trim setting doesn't disable the trim.
Not constantly monitoring airspeed on final approach is potentially deadly...no matter if flying a C152 or a C5.
Obvious issues with Boeing’s technology and the speed of response to the reported problems. Also sad that the critical changes were only driven by the incident.
Boeing’s technology was the best, ...until McDonnell Douglas "reverse-acquired" Boeing with their profit first - safety thirty seventh, management mentality.
@@shotelco That was in 1997. Wikipedia says that, “following Boeing's 1996 acquisition of Rockwell's North American division, McDonnell Douglas merged with Boeing in August 1997 in a US$13 billion stock swap, with Boeing as the surviving company.” Are you saying the MD management style prevailed at Boeing?
@@readlearngrow My ex just retired from MD after 43 years. Boeing would have had a team of 17 engineers working on a single airframe subcomponent, where MD would have 2. Everyone at MD had multiple roles. MD would layoff workers because of budget, yet still continue projects under the same deadlines.
These MD safety decisions were driven by MD senior management. It was MD management that wound up running Boeing post merger due to shareholder ROI pressure.
Do you send your merch to Europe?
Sure do, I use a company that will fulfil the order as close to your locations as possible. They have multiple fulfilment centres all over the world.
You shouldn't worry if your voice is like not pronouncing stuff right. Your great!
Yes...sorta like Nik says, You're Great!!!
Flight level 70 would never be heard in the US. One of the parts that have not been standardized yet. In the USA and Canada, the transition is at 18000 feet (so, you would hear 7000ft and 12000ft, one two thousand, but not flight level 70). In Europe it's variable. Other countries have other altitudes at which they transition from feet to flight level. Seems a minor point, but altitudes are based on local altimeter and flight levels are based on standard 29.92"Hg. So, it makes more sense to keep that at higher altitude, for enroute traffic.
Why have people flying on different altimeter settings?
@@kickedinthecalfbyacow7549 Different governing bodies. FAA in the US, ICAO for most of the world. Some historical reasons, some just due to the fact that there is no agreement all over the world for the transition altitude from local to standard. There are pros and cons with every choice (for example, switching to standard at a lower altitude means that the pilots do not need to receive local information frequently, until they are above transition altitude).
@@webcucciolo it makes sense to all fly at the same setting, unless you’re near the ground
@@kickedinthecalfbyacow7549 You are absolutely correct. But the altitude where this same setting begins varies by country. Which is annoying
The Boeing 737 series has been plagued by a litany of problems. If Boeing had acted immediately to each incident with real and physical measures to address each issue instead of simply suggesting temporary stop-gap repairs and workaround procedures for pilots, they would have saved themselves a whole lot of money and permanent damage to their reputation that culminated with the 737 max debacle. This is what happens when companies put profits before safety. Shame on Boeing!
McD was able to get the FAA to drag out the essential safety mods on the DC-10 airframes in 1972-73 hence the Paris air crash in 1974, costing hundreds of lives.
It really hasn’t, different versions of the 737 have been flying for fifty years, it was the most common airliner for a while, it has a very good safety record, the recent accidents were on the Max variant and have been successfully corrected.
Hmmm, I’m really starting to think that a flight with a safety pilot and/or an F/O under instruction is a flight not to get on. There seems to be a pattern emerging here.
They are giving huge bonuses w/coke and hookers to anyone that can design planes and flight systems that don't require pilot recertification on the new equipment. The flying public are now part of the flight crews training program. Learn as you go with 200 passengers behind you. Not blaming pilots. But human lives are cheap in the eyes of the filthy, bloated turds watching the stock price.
👍🏼
Far too much relying on computers in flight is used. Need to get back to the old school hands on flying.
Visual approach. Don't pilots look out the windscreen anymore? When you've flown the same type airplane many times, you get a mental visual picture of a proper approach. Had this happened at night or in IFR weather I could see it happening with more excuses.
Automation has killed as many people as it seems to have saved. Of course we don't hear about the saves...
Frustrating. I'm an armchair pilot these days but what's wrong with one hand on the yoke and one on the throttles? Humans make mistakes, but when they have to fight the automation too it's not good.
/rant
I like the stuff in your store. I just spent a wad on my birthday but I like the "magic" cup :)
The radio altimeter was replaced 17 times. A EU ban of Turkye was considered.
The dutch Ongevallen Onderzoeksraad' report was rejected by Boeing. Even the report by a swedish university (ordered by the Onderzoeksraad) that gave Boeing its meat.
Turkish Airlines has become a premium brand but......?
How can got it?
Surely the word you were meaning to use when mentioning the aircraft "intercepting the glidepath" was glideslope? As i am sure you know, they aren't exactly the same thing, even though we know what you mean....NB the same goes for "following the glidepath" and being "above the glidepath". In all instances we assume you meant "glideslope"....
That’s fair, I thought about this before recording the video. I try to use terms that everyone can understand as I can have someone with no previous aviation knowledge but also experienced pilots watching. I decided to use ‘glidepath’ because although it is not specific to an ILS, it does encompass the overall vertical guidance for an approach and it would be easier for someone to understand. I try to find a balance between explaining what some things mean and how they work vs the flow of the actual incident. As I had already explained the RADALT and ATIS I didn’t want to then spend more time explaining the ILS and glideslope. A completely valid comment though.
When I flew commercial jets, the flying pilot always kept his hand on the thrust levers during takeoff/approach and landing. It seems like that wasn’t the case here.
Good point
Seems to me that the 737 out foxed 3 expierienced pilots and got flown into the ground, no major mechanical issues or bad weather either, also Turkish airlines seems to be very lax at fixing aircraft issues and training pilots, until this accident !
Die Strecke von Istanbul nach Holland.
Excellent video!
Just 1 tip for u and other native English speakers, since I hear the same mistake from all English speakers. Schiphol is pronounced "Shiphol", NOT "Skipol".
Thank you, I even looked up the pronunciation before recording it and still mispronounced it. Thanks for letting me know 🙂
Time and again, we see too much complicated automation.
12:29 Did he stall it or was it controlled flight into terrain?
The aircraft entered a stall just before the collision.
@@CuriousPilot90 He didn't need altitude. He just needed level flight. So power without pitching the nose up might have saved them.
I think they determined that full power at 450ft would have been enough time for the spool up time and speed increase to recover the aircraft. The reason for the stall (apart from the obvious speed and angle of attack issues) was that the pilot raised the nose in a desperate attempt to extend the glide. Which (I’m not sure of your experience) would have never have worked as the aircraft was most likely way beyond its optimal glide speed but in that situation, even against his better judgment was an act of desperation to achieve and impossible result.
@@CuriousPilot90 Power is the only option is a low-level stall. I pilot exactly what I can pilot safely -- a mouse. Flight 3407 in 2009 crashed near Buffalo because the pilot pulled the nose up in a low level stall. Air safety is one of the greatest accomplishments of western civilization.
Sorry great content but for future reference its pronounced
Ship - hol for Schiphol Airport - SCH in dutch is a SHH sound not SKI
Boeing have such a careless attitude to safety, usually blaming the pilots. As has happened so many times, they barely patch over known faults in the name of profit. If it’s a Boeing, I ain’t going.
Three idiots in the cabin crashed the plane. What would you do if you had a stick shaker in low altitude ? Obvious : full thrust straight away. And then you can reduce the pitch if it's possible. Oh well. Not with that kind of pilots.
why did the flightcrew die? the cookpit looked rather "survival" from the pictures.
The nose wheel came up through the floor into the flight deck
I didn’t know the Boing 737 went back such a long way.
It’s been around for more than 50 years
A professional pilot with not constant awareness of airspeed is not actually a pilot.
Additionally, a pilot with 10k hours of trouble free, lucky flight time, is not necessarily better than a pilot with far less hours but tons of experience with bad weather or equipment failures.
The exteriors are xlnt.
…I’m not afraid of flying only of dying
Look at How theyre recruited and how the company is managed
Interesting
In other words overly computer controlled aircraft .
who writes the introduction summary......NO ONE KNEW THIS FLIGHT WOULD LEAD TO DISASTER,.....?????????!!!!!! do they have a degree in STATING THE BLEEDING OBVIOUS
Why boeing 737s everytime ? 😊
ZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzz ... bring back the Air investigation videos. This really sucks.
I'd call that mode "retard flare" alright
_Al-tim-met-ter,_ perhaps?!?
I mean, do as you please, but _alti-meter_ is unconventional and sounds weird.
Great video otherwise, though.
So what. We all knew what he meant.
Promo*SM
Love your channel but I'm not wearing any thing with CP on it make a new label and just spell out your channel name bro cp is crazy not to Mention diddys plane is in the logo also😂 jp man but 4 real
Turkish airlines does have a high accident rate
Lastest accident was in 2009 which is this
The 2017 one wasnt officially from turkish airlines all the accidents are from errors
Fucking boeing...re-train pilot's for our shi systems
if only the plane had a real pilot, they would have made it. The pilots were relying too much on the computer to fly the plane.
The cases were pilots turned off computer and went manually lead to more devastations
Am i the onley one who thinks boeings make bad planes?
Airbus learned from the mistakes of the boeing and NOT FROM MCDONNEL DEATH KILLER also it nearly never begon unless they did a genius move
Not exactly... It's pretty standard fare in most manufacturing businesses...
In their early days, they had to worry about "building brand" as much as building aircraft, so they were more thorough and careful at every step and level. As they grew, gaining more and more of the over-all market-share, they relax some of the "over-engineering" because it's ALL costly and doesn't always add improvement worthy of the investments...
Up to a "mid-point" in market-share, things are usually well and good... BUT then something happens as the Company reaches a self-recognition as "Industry Leader" or "Giant". They seem to lose their sense and decency, and begin slashing every cost they can. Some companies go as far as efficiency experts to strip things down and streamline the processes that they've used handily for years or even decades. Materials and components get sourced from different (cheaper) places as well, and often to the detriment of those materials and components...
AND largely, the Executives at the top of Company Leadership either put distance or ADD distance between themselves and the processes and the PEOPLE that work those processes for production. It's a fundamental disconnect, whether leadership suddenly shifts to stockholders in New York who have no business actually running a production company... OR the top executives build their own new building or take up office space in another building to isolate themselves either across town or as far as out of state from their actual operations... AND we run into the same idiotic issues every time.
Nothing is ever impossible for a jack-ass sitting in an air-conditioned office who does NOT have to do it.
AND the demands keep raining down on workers while qualities of the job, environment, and supplied material continue to diminish. Eventually, the workers just quit caring, and the job is no longer a prestigious career at a respected company, but another sh*tty, dead-end job at another sh*tty grinder that believes the people are disposable. The ideals of rewarding loyalties and respecting seasoned workers that have been trained and practiced in their fields gives way to a "churn and burn" attitude about employees, and the product qualities "turn to sh*t"...
AND while Boeing is in its decline for this very cyclic reason, THE SAME as McDonell Douglas was before Boeing bought them out... MAKE NO MISTAKE, Airbus isn't far away from their own peak and eventual slide into the same. Signs of their over-confidence are showing... ;o)
Very nicely said. And spot on including the New York douchbags milking every cent out of the company- regardless of the potential cost in lives.
@@gnarthdarkanen7464good insight
@@paulwilfridhunt Thanks... AND thank YOU for reading. ;o)
First
Thank you for the video. Now I can enjoy my dinner with a nice video🙃
Glad to help 😁
Jokers. Totally jokers 🙂
Turkish Airlines is an unsafe airline and they have lost 19 civilian planes so far. 15 of these accidents were fatal.
Flyer beware
No it isn't.
If you want to sell items DO NOT put it in the video. It is disruptive
For all you rooting for Boeing, just remember that they'll be plenty of roots upon landing.
It's sad when these crashes happen outside of India.