View Full Version : Decompression CO1881/8NOV
oliver2002
9th Nov 2006, 05:09
http://flightaware.com/live/flight/COA1881/history/20061109/0036Z/KEWR/KSEA
Just deplaned from CO 1881. The 737-824 (LN 70x?) had a decompression in flight at FL340 around 10.45 EST and ditched to 10 000 ft in aprox 10 mins. Crew very professional. As a SLF I can't comment on the technical details, but the pilot came on after leveling at 10000 ft and said the the automatic and backup system failed and they were manually adjusting cabin pressure. We diverted to KBIS and are now awaiting a CO relief aircraft from KIAH.
Interesting experience. The cypriot 737 decompression incident came to my mind. The FAs acted very quick and the masks deployed without issues.
oliver2002
9th Nov 2006, 05:38
An A310(?) is now on its way from KIAH to pick us up:
http://flightaware.com/live/flight/COA9960
Skyray
13th Nov 2006, 18:58
Anyone ever get any more details on exactly what the cause of the depressurization was?
late developer
15th Nov 2006, 13:42
I am rather surprised there have been no further comments on this thread. Are numbers of PPs sticking heads in sand? Or do the majority know how it happens, won't say, and have assessed that it is of no significance?
Sorry let me get the sand outta my ears... it seems all quiet on the Western Front. I could make something up though. ;)
late developer
15th Nov 2006, 14:17
Well I can see that oliver2002 has told flyertalk that he discovered the faulty aircraft was moved ten hours later. And someone else there says it did not exceed FL250 on that 1194 mile flight and it flew slow.
oliver2002
15th Nov 2006, 18:04
Since no one was posting to my thread I gave up putting up any info here :) I guessed the pprune community was insulted by an SLF daring to post in their hallowed world.:ouch:
A friend of an acquaintance is working with maintainance at CO in IAH. He will let us know what was wrong with the aircraft.
LH499 MEX-FRA made a rather quick landing in PHL yesterday morning:
http://flightaware.com/live/flight/DLH499/history/20061114/0412Z/MMMX/KPHL
It continued a few hours later and landed 6h late in FRA.
Since no one was posting to my thread I gave up putting up any info here :) I guessed the pprune community was insulted by an SLF daring to post in their hallowed world.:ouch:
A friend of an acquaintance is working with maintainance at CO in IAH. He will let us know what was wrong with the aircraft.
LH499 MEX-FRA made a rather quick landing in PHL yesterday morning:
http://flightaware.com/live/flight/DLH499/history/20061114/0412Z/MMMX/KPHL
It continued a few hours later and landed 6h late in FRA.
Oliver, What makes you think you are due an accounting for your experience ? It's not the first time a depressurization has happened and it's not going to be the last, if you wish to over dramatize the occurrence then please go ahead. The facts were (according to your account) the auto-pressurization failed, the checklist was followed the pax and crew were put on another plane to get to where they were going. What else is there to say on a pilots BB ?? If this was a strictly maintenance BB maybe someone could shed some light on the cause, as I hope your friend will do and maybe inform us all. It's a waste of time pontificating on what possibly could have happened (although some may find it fun). Most pilots like to deal with facts, and with so little real facts at hand, it seems rather pointless to speculate.
late developer
16th Nov 2006, 12:51
I think you are being unreasonably critical and condescending, FLCH. No one is asking you to make something up. We are interested in what you know about these systems. And if PPs don't know then oliver2002 is most certainly not overdramatising anything, is he?
Of course oliver2002 is due an accounting of what went wrong. His life was threatened in a real emergency. He paid the airline to get him from A to B reasonably comfortably and safely and they failed. His life was endangered. No question about that whatsoever. He was taken up to 34000 feet where humans without special machines simply die by an airline who then managed to lose his life support system. They then raised his blood pressure along with that of a cabin load of fellow passengers by dropping in his face an alternative cheap and temporary system which actually could support him for a maximum of only 12 or 14 minutes. The resolution of the emergency also required the warning systems to operate correctly, the crew to have identified the fault within seconds, to have donned their own oxygen masks and hope they worked lest they potentially become totally unable to perform within one minute, and for them to immediately descend the aircraft at a high rate which may or may not have injured some passengers in order to stop oliver2002 and his fellow passengers dying from eventual asphyxiation or something else.
And you say that because this is a pilot's BB there is nothing more to say than that a checklist was followed and it all seemed to turn out right in the end?
Who is responsible for deciding several times a day whether to launch these machines up to the Tropopause? Is it the autopilot perhaps? Who is responsible for maintaining the life support systems throughout the flight? Oh that would be the autopressurisation system, eh? ... oh not forgetting the maintenance engineers on the ground with their own bulletin board? Right. On a Space Shuttle maybe. On 737s there have been too many pressurisation incidents for most people's liking. 737-800s are the workhorse of a number of modern fleets which means many of us rely on them. On a 738 it's you who is responsible for the whole shooting match after the doors close! ... that's why we want to hear from you now.
Something along the lines of "Oi you! You fly a 737-800? Tell us what pressurisation systems and procedural problems / oversights you know about that might cause failures, ... please. We've seen too many on 737 and we don't like the fact that a whole generation of newer aircraft on fast turnaround / minimum maintenance ops seem similarly affected."
I was trained as a scientist, a physicist. That meant I looked at the world around me and wondered why things might behave the way they do. It didn't mean that I dismissed observations I couldn't explain and waited patiently to be fed "facts" by people who might know more than me. That's for GSCE students. I learned to know for myself what is fact, what is well-formed hypothesis, what is wishful thinking, and what is plain arrogance and denial.
Also, later on I also got to appreciate how all these things are routinely interchanged to avoid liability for negligence when accidents occur.
I am not interested in pointing any finger. I am just impatient to drive out complacency from aviation so when I and my family fly I only have to worry about whether I can afford the money not my life.
If you personally have your reasons for not wanting to pass on what you know, that's your prerogative.
Beanbag
16th Nov 2006, 13:43
LD, even if we accept your assertion that oliver2002 is entitled to an explanation, that doesn't mean any PPRuNer is obliged to provide it. The airline would be the place to go with demands; here the most a poster is entitled to is to hope that someone with knowledge finds the question sufficiently interesting to post a response.
Jet Blast ............. please
Octopussy2
16th Nov 2006, 14:11
FLCH and beanbag: to be fair, I Oliver2002 doesn't seem to have been asking for an "accounting" - he made a post about his experience and, when no-one showed any interest, he stopped posting, so what's the problem?
I confess, I do find the lack of interest, in itself, interesting. Is depressurization such a common occurrence that you regard it as just routine? Is it genuinely not a scary event for the crew?