Air Canada North Atlantic Mayday

[Toomuchsmegma]

Apparently, while enroute from FRA, called the mayday due to smoke in the cabin with 270 passengers on board. Landed safely in KEF in Iceland an hour later. Anyone have anymore details?

[Tan]

Welcome [Sign In] To track stocks & more, Register
Financial News
Enter symbol(s) BasicDayWatchPerformanceReal-time MktDetailedChartResearchOptionsOrder Book Symbol Lookup







Reuters
UPDATE - Air Canada flight diverted to Iceland due to smoke
Monday August 18, 5:09 pm ET

(Adds flight number, details in paragraph 4)
MONTREAL, Aug 18 (Reuters) - An Air Canada (Toronto:AC.TO - News) flight carrying 269 passengers from Frankfurt to Toronto made a "precautionary landing" in Iceland on Monday after smoke poured into the passenger cabin.

"The cause of the smoke is under investigation but it is believed to be from a malfunctioning recirculation fan," Air Canada spokeswoman Isabelle Arthur said.

The crew of the Boeing (NYSE:BA - News) 747-400 cut power to the fan and all non-essential electrical equipment as soon as the problem was detected, Arthur said.

Air Canada flight 873 landed about an hour later in Reykjavik and no passengers were hurt in the incident, she said.

Air Canada sent another plane to pick up the stranded passengers. They are expected to arrive in Toronto early Tuesday morning.

[KingAir]

and over on the other ocean...


http://the.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/2003/Aug/18/ln/ln22a.html


Air Canada flight makes emergency landing after blowing tires on takeoff

By Karen Blakeman
Advertiser Staff Writer

An Air Canada Flight from Honolulu to Sydney made an emergency landing early yesterday at Honolulu International Airport after blowing out two tires on takeoff.

The Air Canada Airbus A340 departed from the gate to Honolulu's runway 8R at about 2:30 a.m. yesterday, said Scott Ishikawa, spokesman for the Department of Transportation.

Two tires on the plane's main landing gear blew out on takeoff, Ishikawa said. According to the gear manufacturer the main landing gear are two gear structures — each with four wheels — behind the nose gear and on either side of the A340's centerline gear.

The pilot made it safely into the air, but turned around to make the emergency landing on runway 8L.

Crash teams stood by while the aircraft landed, but the runway was not foamed, Ishikawa said. The plane made it to the ground safely at about 3:15 a.m., and no one was injured.

Fearing pieces of the blown tires may have been strewn across runways 8R and 8L and posed safety hazards to other flights, airport officials diverted traffic from the two runways until after the sun rose and the runways could be cleared.

Passengers from the Air Canada flight disembarked, and the plane remained parked at the airport yesterday while federal officials investigated the cause of the tire failure, Ishikawa said.

Reach Karen Blakeman at 535-2430 or [email protected].




Cheers to crews of both aircraft for getting the passengers, crew, and the aircraft down safely.

[robmac]

I was pax in a UA 747 year before last when the (as discovered later) circulation fan malfunctioned and the cabin filled with electrical smoke.

Only problem was we were SYD-LAX and somewhere mid-Pacific at night.

The Captain made an announcement, all non essential electrics shut down, and crew plus a couple of pax who were firemen, went looking for the problem found it and isolated it.

It was bizarre as most of the pax were asleep and did not wake up, and I stood in the galley in subdued emergency lighting with a large JD and coke, making small talk with the CC, as we continued on track.

The fault was found suppressed isolated and power restored. Full marks to the Captain who managed to sound very laid back at the potential choice of flying till the wings fell off or ditching at night mid pacific, I guess the surrealism helped, however full marks to the crew in a tough corner with few choices.

Now what is it with 747s and those fans, anyone ??

[cyrano_de_bergerac]

Interesting story Robmac ... did you get the impression that the fan might have combusted had the firemen not intervened? What exactly did they do?

I don't think you need to be mid-Pacific to worry about a fire putting you up the creek very quickly, but it certainly doesn't improve your chances!

I think the lesson of past aircraft fires is that you have to be aggressive in diagnosing and supressing the source.

Even very recently, cabin crew don't always seem to understand that. The link http://www.fire.tc.faa.gov/pdf/systems/Marker-InaccessibleAreas.pdf shows a few incidents that has let the NTSB to recommend a more active approach.

I think the one with 23 fatilities, one flight attendent remarked afterwards that he/she 'didn't want to damage the airplane' by hacking panels to get at the source of fire.

Screw the panels, I say... if CC sees smoke, I'm hoping one's grabbing an extinguisher, the other an axe, and they start swinging!

[robmac]

Cyrano,

The impression that I had from CC and the firefighters was that the fan was continuing to smoke until they had suppressed it, and that it would have represented an ongoing fire risk had it not been secured.

[CD]

cyrano_de_bergerac wrote:

I think the lesson of past aircraft fires is that you have to be aggressive in diagnosing and supressing the source.

Even very recently, cabin crew don't always seem to understand that.

Hi cyrano...

I think that the NTSB document you really wanted to reference is NTSB Safety Recommendations A-01-83 through -87 ~ Recent In-Flight Fires (http://www.ntsb.gov/Recs/letters/2001/A01_83_87.pdf). This document contains the specific training failures that you implied in your post, such as:

The captain instructed her not to use the Halon extinguisher, indicating he was concerned about spraying Halon in the cabin.

Flight attendant No. 1 reported that the smoke became so dense she could no longer see the forward galley. However, neither flight attendant made any effort to locate the source of the smoke or to use any of the firefighting equipment available to them.

Flight attendant No. 1 asked the passengers if anyone had a knife that could be used to cut the ceiling panel. A passenger produced a knife and cut a circular hole in the blistered area of the ceiling panel. Flight attendant No. 1 then fully discharged a Halon fire extinguisher into the hole.

The Safety Issues section is very interesting and highlights some of the specific problems that exist in the FAA training standards:

In the American incident, the flight attendant did access the area behind the ceiling panel, but the method used (that is, having a passenger cut a hole in the ceiling) risked damage to electrical wiring and other cables that may have been covered by the paneling. In addition, although the flight attendant’s action successfully extinguished the fire, access to the area behind the panel should not have been dependent on the actions of a passenger, either to provide a sharp instrument for cutting or to cut the hole itself. (of course, you don't have to worry about reliance on a passenger now due to the security measures...)

The Safety Board is concerned that, in two of the occurrences described in this letter, crewmembers hesitated to use Halon extinguishers. In the Delta incident, the captain specifically ordered a flight attendant not to use the Halon extinguisher because he was concerned about Halon being sprayed in the cabin. In the AirTran accident, an off-duty crewmember chose not to use the Halon extinguisher because of his concern that it “would take away more oxygen” from the cabin.:suspect:

Therefore, the National Transportation Safety Board recommends that the Federal Aviation Administration:

Issue an advisory circular (AC) that describes the need for crewmembers to take immediate and aggressive action in response to signs of an in-flight fire. The AC should stress that fires often are hidden behind interior panels and therefore may require a crewmember to remove or otherwise gain access to the area behind interior panels in order to effectively apply extinguishing agents to the source of the fire. (A-01-83)

Require principal operations inspectors to ensure that the contents of the advisory circular (recommended in A-01-83) are incorporated into crewmember training programs. (A-01-84)

Amend 14 Code of Federal Regulations 121.417 to require participation in firefighting drills that involve actual or simulated fires during crewmember recurrent training and to require that those drills include realistic scenarios on recognizing potential signs of, locating, and fighting hidden fires. (A-01-85)

Develop and require implementation of procedures or airplane modifications that will provide the most effective means for crewmembers to gain access to areas behind interior panels for the purpose of applying extinguishing agent to hidden fires. As part of this effort, the FAA should evaluate the feasibility of equipping 10 interior panels of new and existing airplanes with ports, access panels, or some other means to apply extinguishing agent behind interior panels. (A-01-86)

Issue a flight standards handbook bulletin to principal operations inspectors to ensure that air carrier training programs explain the properties of Halon and emphasize that the potential harmful effects on passengers and crew are negligible compared to the safety benefits achieved by fighting in-flight fires aggressively.(A-01-87)

[RatherBeFlying]

Letter to Editor in August. 26 Globe and Mail
Copyright Globe and Mail

Passengers calm

By SCOTT MORTON
Bedford, N.S.

My wife and I were passengers on Air Canada Flight 873 from Frankfurt to Toronto last Monday, which was diverted into Iceland as a result of an emergency situation. The smell in the cabin prior to diversion was unmistakable. The sight of cabin attendants scurrying about, opening overhead luggage compartments and looking for a source added to the sense of urgency. As a former military pilot having flown out of Keflavik, I was relieved when our captain announced he was headed for this field with its complete crash facilities. From the time of initiation of the diversion to the final stop on the runway, well over an hour, my fellow passengers behaved in a very disciplined fashion. Emergency evacuation cards were quietly read and conversations involving the use of emergency oxygen masks were had. The overall sense in the airliner was one of quiet preparedness. That atmosphere promptly changed when the aircraft came to a complete stop on the runway and everyone realized they had actually made it to the ground in one piece. Cheers for our captain were unrepressed and everyone onboard was extremely thankful to all those involved in the safe recovery of Flight 873.

Kudos for both pax and crew:ok:

[PPRuNe Radar]

Though corrected in the following report, the Reuters report is incorrect is saying that AC have 747-400s: they do not.

Don't tell Air Canada ... they still think they do ;)

Air Canada Fleet (http://www.aircanada.ca/about-us/our-fleet/)

[604guy]

Lucifer

I was on a 747-400 shrewdly diguised in Air Canada livery about 6 months ago.

[JW411]

And one of them appears at LHR every day.

[Lucifer]

Apologies - I am obviously talkikng out of the wrong hole.