Hey, these weren’t supposed to happen!
SAN FRANCISCO (AP) - A United Airlines jet bound for Honolulu from Los Angeles landed safely at San Francisco International Airport after a warning light indicated a fire was burning in the rear cargo pit. Officials kept the Boeing 777 away from the airport's terminals Sunday until officials confirmed no fire existed and a mechanical malfunction had triggered the indicator light, said Jeff Green, a United Airlines spokesman. None of the 363 passengers and crew aboard were injured.
The crew of Flight 55 activated fire extinguishers in the aircraft's cargo section as a safety measure before landing just before 3 p.m., Green said. United Airlines is investigating the incident, though there was no indication Sunday of suspicious activity, Green said.
‘NEW YORK (AP) -- An engine fire forced a Spanish jumbo jet with 386 people aboard to return to Kennedy Airport, and seven passengers were injured during the emergency evacuation. One man said the evacuation was hampered by difficulty opening two exit doors.
Pilots turned the Madrid-bound Iberia Air Lines plane Sunday around "due to a fire warning light for the No. 2 engine," said Arlene Salac, a spokeswoman for the Federal Aviation Administration.
All passengers and crew were evacuated after the Boeing 747 landed at about 7:20 p.m., Salac said.’
JBS>An insidious consequence of the insults against contributors from the non contributors is that potential contributors will be afraid to contribute for fear of ridicule. That may be the intention of the hecklers; to stifle free exchange of ideas. I am picky on punctuation, spelling, meanings, and grammar as they are the expression of important ideas and need to be precise.
JBS>So certain. You would make a good politician, actor, or lawyer. We are talking about an unexplained crash, nothing is impossible at this time. Anything ‘can’ happen.
MM> Thanks for the insult!
JBS>Actor, lawyer, and politician...which one of those careers is an insult? They are the most highly paid and respected persons in society, and when told you speak like them you are insulted? You speak like them because they are able to persuade convincingly without the need for data to support the smooth assurances.
MM> I remain Anonymous because that is my right too & i dont want to be pestered by idiots with crackpot theories.
JBS> You might have to reply, identify yourself, and then be criticized for your grammar and punctuation errors.
MM> I have my own theories on why this Aircraft broke up, but i will wait until i know more of the facts being i make a judgement.
JBS>Of course, if you contribute you might be ridiculed and called bad names. (And not for your spelling errors.)
MM>You on the other hand jump to conclusions before all the facts are known and do not listen to other peoples opinions.
JBS>Well, there you have proof of your misunderstandings. I have consistently stated the possible causes of the inflight breakup for China Airlines Flight 611 and have not ‘jumped to the conclusion’ it was the a shorted wiring/aft cargo door rupture/rapid decompression/inflight breakup explanation. I listen to everyone’s opinions and usually comment.
MM> i disagree completely with your Cargo Door theories.
JBS> But you never say why except to say it can’t happen because it’s not supposed to happen because of tubes, bellcranks, and locking sectors. You know a lot about how they are supposed to work but little of when they don’t work.
MM> You jump to conclusions before all the facts are known, example proved by your post about the BA aircraft having cargo door wiring fire. The facts so far point to a galley chiller but lets wait and find out before speculating.
JBS> Absolutely incorrect. I wrote, ‘That pesky wiring in the forward cargo compartment of Boeing 747s... ‘ and ‘Significance is if fire was wiring caused then the bad wiring does more than short on a on door unlatch motor occasionally. It's starting fires.’ Nowhere in there is anything about cargo door wiring nor conclusions.
Are you not upset at a 'galley chiller' causing a fire? Or are fires in forward cargo holds so normal they are to be expected? And why wait for the opinions of those on the ground before trying to figure out the problem. You think they have a priority? The crews have the priority. The opinions of the crews should be first, then everyone else.
MM> but then its all a big conspiracy to hide the cargo door fault!
JBS> As many times as I write there is no conspiracy, there are those that wish it so and try to put the words in my mouth.
You have completely destroyed any credibility or value of your opinions with your above quotes. They reveal you do not research the subject (failed cargo doors), you do not read the posts accurately to which you reply, you are partially illiterate, and you are insolent.
MM> I hear the X files are looking for a new writer!
Add sarcastic. It's an upside down world when a person suggests mechanical problem such as wiring to explain an accident and is accused of conspiracy explanations while the authorities blame foreign bombers from Libya, Syria, Iran, unknown, or Sikhs (take your pick) and are considered to be 'normal.'
SaturnV>JBS, I heartedly agree with what Mechanical Man said about your already having concluded that China Airlines 611 was caused by a failure of a cargo door.
JBS>You guys know my mind better than I do? Ha! And I have not made my mind up as stated often in this forum. Could be lots of things, down to two in my mind, repair doubler failure or aft cargo door rupture. Still could be aft pressure bulkhead failure, missile, or bomb.
SaturnV> I don't think any amount of future argument or evidence will persuade you otherwise.
JBS>You think wrong. I changed from forward cargo door to aft hull rupture right away after I learned of the debris field, sound on the CVR and now the picture of the shattered cargo door.
SaturnV>You certainly haven't been persuaded by the great preponderance of the evidence indicating that the losses of PA 103, TW 800, and Air India 182 were caused by something other than an in-flight failure of a cargo door.
JBS>You know nothing of the’ great preponderance of the evidence indicating that the losses of PA 103, TW 800, and Air India 182 were caused by something other than an in-flight failure of a cargo door. ‘
You do know a lot about what the newspapers, the police authorities, and the lawyers say about the causes of those accidents but you do not know the evidence one way or the other. You have not read all the government AARs for those accidents, you have not read my AARs for them, you have not read the Public Docket or the appendices, you have not had private correspondence with victims who survived and families of those that did not, nor the addendums on those accidents.
But you do know the absurd scenarios put forth by the police about bombs in planes that get loaded two or three flights prior and blow up to produce a 20 inch shatter hole on the port side for Pan Am Flight 103 and no evidence of a bomb for the Canadians to call Air India Flight 182 a bomb explosion.
You see, I trust the evidence, not the massaged explanations which you so readily believe...because you want to believe. I understand how flight crews and mechanics really really really want to believe those cargo doors will not pop in flight and how anybody that says they might is a <bad name>.
A massaged explanation is not a conspiracy. It is a massaged explanation.
Nobody wants to do research which might lead to very unpleasant news. Better to repeat opinions of the authorities that everything is all right, the problems have been fixed, everybody go home, the excitement is over.