PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - Differences in pressurisation systems and operational and technical difficulties.
Old 4th November 2024 | 05:49
  #5 (permalink)  
pattern_is_full
15 Anniversary
 
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,269
Likes: 79
From: Denver
Originally Posted by Kate777
Thank you. I meant to say the difference between military and civilian transport aircraft.
The translation was not correct.

I wanted to study the JL123 case personally, and because a colleague asked me about the pressurisation system on military transport aircraft.
Thanks. The JL123 tragedy was not a failure of the system(s) that provided the pressurization as such. It was a failure of the physical structure that was supposed to hold the pressure inside the aircraft.

In effect, "the balloon popped" because the "balloon" itself was faulty - due to an incompetent repair years earlier. Even normal, correct and functional pressurization was too much for it.

It would have been a survivable event if it has been only a faulty pressurization system. But the containment dome that blew out also broke all the hydraulic-power pipes, and a tail-fin, that allowed control of the aircraft. And the pilots were ultimately (after a heroic 45 minutes keeping the 747 airborne even with virtually no control except engine thrust variations) unable to avoid flying into a mountain.

As to military aircraft my knowledge is limited. They will generally use the same systems, but in different ways.

Aircraft that will be subject to combat are likely to lose any pressurization containment due to enemy fire (bullet and shrapnel holes in the aircraft), so may depend less on it (even if they have it) than civilian aircraft.
pattern_is_full is offline  
Reply