PPRuNe Forums

Go Back   PPRuNe Forums > Rest of the World & Non-English Language Forums > Middle East
Forgotten your Username/Password?
PPRuNe Email Register FAQ Calendar Advertise Mark Forums Read

Middle East Many expats still flying in Knoteetingham. Regional issues can be discussed here.


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 8th August 2008, 18:26   #1 (permalink)
ddd
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Paradise
Age: 46
Posts: 51
Smoke on EK 777

This is quite funny..... in yesterday's GDN:

Smoke alert aboard flight

DUBAI: An Emirates flight from Kuwait City to Dubai had to abort its take-off last night after smoke was detected in the cabin, a spokesman of the Dubai-based carrier said.The captain of the Boeing 777-200, which was carrying 346 passengers, made the decision shortly after the plane started picking up speed on the runway."Preliminary assessment by the captain indicated that the smoke came from the exhaust," he said, adding that more investigation was needed.He said one passenger was slightly injured after he left his seat while the plane was still moving, apparently in panic. All passengers continued their journey to Dubai on board another Emirates plane.

ddd is offline  
Reply
Old 8th August 2008, 19:36   #2 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: sunny land
Posts: 26
what kind of crap they put in the paper nowadays...
kamaciwa is offline   Reply
Old 9th August 2008, 03:24   #3 (permalink)
ddd
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Paradise
Age: 46
Posts: 51
Axe air hostesses

This one is even better !!! In today's GDN letters:

Axe air hostesses


I read the letter on Gulf Air service (GDN, August 3) and really wonder why airlines need air hostess at all. Actually, I don't think we need to pay extra money just to be fed some food so many metres high in the sky, which is anyway not always tasty or healthy. I really feel airlines could save a lot of money by eliminating air hostesses and the so-called, lunch, dinner or snacks. This cost-cutting should reflect in the price of our tickets. I'm sure airlines have to shell out a lot of money for the salaries and hotel accommodation and other benefits provided to the air hostesses. Airlines should concentrate on the maintenance of the flights and remove the unwanted costs. Roy
ddd is offline   Reply
Old 9th August 2008, 15:03   #4 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: OMDB
Posts: 46
you are 100% right DDD, safety is an absolutely unwanted cost !
baob2oba is offline   Reply
Old 10th August 2008, 18:03   #5 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Dayaftertomorrowland
Posts: 85
Rumour as in myth?

Guys - please get your infos right, or I ll have to book mark PPRuNe under 'spam'.
Uncontained APU failure on takeoff. Debris took out two hydraulic systems plus some air duct plumbing which later on caused the smoke.
The idiot who got injured was a pissed up brit (yeah - I know: stereotype) who despite cabin crew warnings made his way to the loo during takeoff.
After they patched him up and a sobering nap, he claims he wanted to warn crew because he heard 'noises'.
MrMachfivepointfive is offline   Reply
Old 11th August 2008, 19:47   #6 (permalink)
Probationary PPRuNer
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Bahrain
Posts: 2
Perhaps we should try something along the lines of Roy's suggestion. How about minimum crew per aircraft just to arm/disarm the doors, open them if there is an emergency and do first aid if required (Panadol not included). Accommodation downroute provided by the YMCA, no need for smart uniforms, just jeans and a t-shirt.

Let the pax sort out their own seating problems, bring their own drinks, lunch,newspapers, nappies etc. They would also need to bring their own entertainment as movies are hardly essential to their safety.

Perhaps it could go forward to "My Idea" or whatever the scheme is to save the company cash.
Sandfox is offline   Reply
Old 11th August 2008, 20:23   #7 (permalink)
White Knight
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Dubai - sand land.
Age: 39
Posts: 876
Not knowing Boeing - is it normal to have the APU running on 777 on take-off or were they required to use it due to an MEL restriction?
Certainly on the 'Bus it's off.... Unless required for performance, but I've never seen it needed for that reason..

White Knight is offline  
Reply
Old 12th August 2008, 14:01   #8 (permalink)
bus787
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: China
Posts: 112
Mr Mach5 can you elaborate on your FACTS.how can the brit be pissed departing KUWAIT? isnt it a dry country?

bus787 is offline  
Reply
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes


Posting Rules
vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
smoke it.pilot737 Tech Log 3 29th March 2007 22:03
smoke 03 headset man Rumours & News 2 28th May 2005 11:17
Up in smoke? Rallye Driver Jet Blast 1 21st May 2003 23:22
Up in smoke Iso South Asia and the Far East 9 5th May 2002 11:01
Ever see "Up in smoke"? Cyclic Hotline Jet Blast 1 22nd May 2001 14:30


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 22:22.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO 3.2.0 RC7
© 1996-2008 The Professional Pilots Rumour Network

As these are anonymous forums the origins of the contributions may be opposite to what may be apparent. In fact the press may use it, or the unscrupulous, or sciolists*, to elicit certain reactions.

*"sciolist"... Noun, archaic. "a person who pretends to be knowledgeable and well informed".