すべて
← Back to Squawk list
SIA 317 (A380) depressurizes...
Interesting article on the observations of a passenger, and resultant diversion. (www.straitstimes.com) さらに...Sort type: [Top] [Newest]
This happened to us shortly after takeoff from SFO enroute to HK via Tokyo. It was a 747-100 and as we climbed a whine developed in the front port door. Luckily we had several techies on board (Texas Instruments I think). After much inspection by flight deck a strategy was developed. The cabin crews took those towels they give you to wipe your face/hands and with ice tongs dropped several of them into the door liner. Bingo. Noise ended with a whoosh. When we were met at the gate by mechanics there were literally 40 or so napkins littering the jetway and since I don't speek Japanese I couldn't interpret what the guys were saying as they jumped out of the way of falling napkins lol.
450+ pax, plus crew, and nobody had any duct tape? Now if that had been on an American flight then damnstraight someone would have pulled a roll out of their carryon and sealed that puppy up good. Provided TSA hadn't confiscated it that is.
Either the Captian was ill informed or a very poor mistake in judgement was made. The chances of the door failing and flying of as the story writer was concerned are almost impossible, not over a seal leak. They should have dumped fuel and returned to Londen. This is where the question comes in. What did the cost of the fuel dump factor into the captain decision to press on. The cabin condition should have been enough to tell that the seal has now totally failed and would continue to deteriorate causing the leak to worsen. Not to mention passenger discomfort.
The cost of the fuel dump should not have been a factor in the decision. The only factors to consider were saftey of flight and passenger comfort. Their will be an inquiry I wonder if this will come out.
The cost of the fuel dump should not have been a factor in the decision. The only factors to consider were saftey of flight and passenger comfort. Their will be an inquiry I wonder if this will come out.
There will always be overt and/or implicit pressure to press on and not dump fuel, when so much fuel is Involved.
The cost of fuel will always be a factor on an A380 intercontinental long-haul flight. It's one major strike against the super jumbos (or any super jumbo) with so many passengers' souls aboard, and with so much fuel loaded. Especially early in flight, when many mechanical problems pop up, which leads to a decisions to either dump when at or close to max fuel, or to take a chance and continue on. Sooner or later, such a decision to push forward may result in the loss of an entire super jumbo's worth of souls.
Emirates got as far as Kuwait recently. SIA just got as far as Azerbaijan. Hope every flight that continues on despite mx issues because of substantial fuel load, finds a safe port to put down every time. The alternative would be horrendous for many.
The cost of fuel will always be a factor on an A380 intercontinental long-haul flight. It's one major strike against the super jumbos (or any super jumbo) with so many passengers' souls aboard, and with so much fuel loaded. Especially early in flight, when many mechanical problems pop up, which leads to a decisions to either dump when at or close to max fuel, or to take a chance and continue on. Sooner or later, such a decision to push forward may result in the loss of an entire super jumbo's worth of souls.
Emirates got as far as Kuwait recently. SIA just got as far as Azerbaijan. Hope every flight that continues on despite mx issues because of substantial fuel load, finds a safe port to put down every time. The alternative would be horrendous for many.
Well, said. Exactly what I was wondering about the decision process on the flight deck.
This is not the first time when there was a problem with the door seal on A380
I believe SIA has some understanding how serious it can be
I believe SIA has some understanding how serious it can be