Pictures and official description at

http://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=19869999-1

The explanation given is not exactly correct and likely is the narrative the pilot gave to keep from losing his license/job, or perhaps other consequences given the nature of the regime at the time. The pictures appear to have been taken some time after the accident (rust on panels) and it is likely not the original location. Looks like it was dragged away.

No dependency on computers necessary for people to do stupid things. We blame automation but incompetence, failure to follow procedures, complacency, and dysfunctional cultural norms (ethnic or professional) are often a major contributor to disasters.

At a desert oil production station (Gialo) in Libya in the 80's a pilot crashed an LAA F27 passenger plane carrying field workers when he attempted a landing on the old runway instead of the new one.

The day was perfectly clear: not a cloud in the sky. Visibility was extremely good. Virtually no wind.

The old runway had been dusted over with crushed white Saharan calichi which made it fade into the surrounding background of light tan hardpan and sand. To further discourage use of the old runway, loads of rock had been dumped in piles down the centre end to end.

The new runway was inline with and off the end of the old. Brand spanking new asphalt, black as midnight, complete with high contrast runway markings and looking like big black stripe on a pale background. A blindman in a snowstorm could not miss the dang thing; it fairly screamed LAND HERE.

The NOTAMs were updated properly and anyone flying into Gialo would see the runway info as the first item.

Nonetheless, the pilot made his usual approach over the station like he had done many many times previous and did not realize the mistake until he was just about to touch down. Pulled up but a wheel caught a rock pile and he pranged the nose into the old strip. Go figure.

No one was killed and as far as I saw, they all walked off. One fella (a Brit of some flavour) had been sleeping and stepped out saying 'What's all the fuss about?". We turned him about and, gazing at the bent props, crushed nose and broken gear, he said: "Felt like a regular landing to me."

So ....

If it's 'worthless' why are you even bothering to read anything here, let alone comment? Anyways, my insult was directed at the original AC and his/her ignorant comment ---- not ALL AC commentators. Seemed very clear.

Anonymous commenting is fine by me but 'no guts' same same 'coward' as in AC . . .

Why you felt a need is beyond my ken.

Cheers

Too funny actually. I thought I would get modded for trolling but this be /.

Comments galore for a trivial grammar post but a score 5 insightful on a security thread merits no discussion.

's ok. Tis only the human condition to take small things to heart and let the large objects pass by. Need budget approval for $100K server capital; no problem. Need a $15 screwdriver kit from Canadian Tire to put the beasts in the rack? That requires a business case.

Cheers

Exactamundo!

Verily and to wit! My bristling beard is scaring the cat.

No guts, eh? Won't log in. What a putz.

'effect' may be used as a noun or as a verb.

From dictionary.com although a more detailed listing may be found in the OED:

verb (used with object)
10. to produce as an effect; bring about; accomplish; make happen: The new machines finally effected the transition to computerized accounting last spring.

Thus 'effect this change' is correct and in this case 'affect this change' is wrong. (changing the change, which BTW did not happen)

Go directly to grammer jail. Do not collect any reward. Let the beatings commence!

As Red Forman says: "Dumbass". 8->

In the summary, 'affect this change' [grrrrrr] should be 'effect this change'. It could have read 'affect the situation'.

Oh the humanity: I'm having flashbacks of my grade 8 grammar teacher thrashing us mercilessly for just such an offense. Twas eons ago and most of my grammar synapses have degenerated to dust but the affect/effect thingy persists.

I whimper.

8-P

Well now, it's been my keen observation over the years that people suspect of others the same nefarious behaviour that they indulge in themselves or would do given the opportunity. I am sure that there exist proposals to have Cisco/Juniper/Akami network gear do more than is advertised.

Knowing that the West intelligence services would do (are doing??) what Lenovo & Huawei are suspected of is enough to have those companies banned, at least in CIA/NSA thinking.

It's difficult enough to keep malware out of the network as it is without providing an easy doorway.

eg: stuxnet

However, if evaluation of the policy to ban Lenovo were up to me, I would do a serious risk evaluation and compare Lenovo to others such as Dell. Truth is that state sponsored malware could be introduced at many levels including embedded firmware in say, network or video chipsets.

I suspect that the multinational component sourcing makes banning Lenovo analogous to plugging a small hole in a screen door while leaving all the windows open.

AC not funny,

Must be DC.

I don't understand how Canipre intends to be effective against the endpoint downloader. Canada's legal environment is significantly different from that of the US.

Criminal punishment is very limited by the recent legislation and civil judgements are limited to actual concrete losses. If somebody illegally downloads a song worth, say, $1 then the civil loss is $1. The plaintiff is not necessarily likely to get court costs either, especially if the judge feels the $1 could have easily changed hands without resorting to civil court.

At least that is what I have observed.

Perhaps their model is to get lots of funding from big business and impress them by arching their legal 'backs' (see how big I am) and making lots of hissing/spitting noises.

er. . . Typically these are tied to dial up modems or to IP port servers. They are used to access systems when the secure front door is unavailable due to Internet outages, firewall problems or the access gateway being unavailable.

You would not think anyone would be so dumb to set these up but sone may be legacy, or put in place by a local hero sysadmin.

It may even be, get this, a contractually required remote support access point. Many vendors have a very limited concept of what is required to prevent unauthorized access. One vendor sales guy told me that it was secure because no one would know about the dial up number and they had no reported break ins at other installations.

Sigh.

Of course there are ways of providing secure alternative access paths but there are a lot of folk who are under the impression that obscurity is sufficient.

Another issue besides the lack of authentication is the lack of logging and activity reporting. One outfit I did some work for spent a dinghy full of large bills on an IPS for the network side but would not pay for caller ID on their dial-up access point. Against their financial responsibility policy to pay for frivilous monthly charges.

⦠a friend of mine and his wife just passed the Canadian citizenship test. I said 'Congrats! You have just earned the right to bitch about everything along side the rest of us. And what's the deal with the Oilers eh?'

He said that's exactly what his wife said (minus the hockey bit).