Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Misc. Forums > Passengers & SLF (Self Loading Freight)
Reload this Page >

Swiss 146 engine explodes at London City

Passengers & SLF (Self Loading Freight) If you are regularly a passenger on any airline then why not post your questions here?

Swiss 146 engine explodes at London City

Old 27th Mar 2014, 22:40
  #21 (permalink)  
Location, Location, Location
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: If it moves, watch it like a hawk: If it doesn't, hit it with a hammer until it does...
Age: 60
Posts: 142
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Yes you would. You're human.
Sorry, but wrong.

My day job frequently involves making split second decisions and taking action where serious injury and lives are potentially at stake.

In order to make such decisions in a timely manner I think about all possible scenarios and consider my reaction to those events prior to it being necessary; call it forward planning if you will, or even conditioning may be a better description.

Any situation, if practised frequently enough even if only as a thought experiment, can become 'human' nature.

mocoman is offline  
Old 27th Mar 2014, 22:44
  #22 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Everett, WA
Age: 68
Posts: 4,357
Received 157 Likes on 75 Posts
I'm guessing "engine explodes" was a considerable exaggeration relative to what really happened.

Most likely an engine failure, surge, and aborted takeoff. The great balls of fire coming out both ends of an engine during a surge can be pretty dramatic, but it's a long way from an actual "engine explodes".
tdracer is offline  
Old 27th Mar 2014, 22:54
  #23 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Australia - South of where I'd like to be !
Age: 59
Posts: 4,261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Mocoman

The studies done that show military, police, emergency service type people do better in emergency type situations like plane crashes and have a higher survival rate.

The ability to process information fast and make a decision quickly and then act on that is important.
500N is offline  
Old 28th Mar 2014, 05:37
  #24 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: PA USA
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Simple solution, anyone who simply must have their bags must wait until everyone else is off prior to leaving aircraft.

If you find yourself blocking a row you must move to the next available empty row to wait to collect your bags.

That way if the plane is in fact in any danger, only those that feel their bags are more important than their own, or more importantly anyone else's lives will be left on the aircraft.

Perhaps a locking mechanism could be developed for the overheads to ensure compliance with this.

I certainly understand the need to keep your bag when traveling, but not at the expense of some 5 year old kid and his mother.

Just because you don't see anything wrong from your 5a window doesn't meant there is not an inferno just outside 32 f.
fr8tmastr is offline  
Old 28th Mar 2014, 06:53
  #25 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Zurich
Age: 45
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Question re precious cargo

This is the flight we take v frequently. I know that the risk of doing so didn't change but accidents tend to focus the mind

So a question to all - how would I get my precious cargo put in an emergency?
By precious cargo I mean the baby and the toddler and not my bag by te way

I already make sure I know the exits and Mr Kitten insists I count the rows to exit and recall I am not in the car
MmeKitten is offline  
Old 28th Mar 2014, 07:06
  #26 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Hughenden, UK
Age: 74
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Depends on your handbaggage

Last thing on hand baggage. I travel with a £1500 laptop with massive amounts of data. OK, I do have back-up elsewhere, but if it a small aircraft that I have to exit in a hurry and the hull is intact my instinct is that the hassle of taking said laptop is considerably less than that of leaving & losing Call me selfish, but it would be my split-second decision.
Flyingmole is offline  
Old 28th Mar 2014, 07:35
  #27 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: South Africa
Age: 87
Posts: 1,329
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Anybody that even thinks it is OK to mess around with hand baggage has obviously forgotton about this:

British Airtours Flight 28M - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Maybe there is now a generation of travellers too young to know about it.
ian16th is offline  
Old 28th Mar 2014, 08:20
  #28 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: FL400
Posts: 398
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Flyingmole, generally speaking, if we order an evacuation, it is absolutely the last resort. It is not a decision that is taken lightly because we are well aware that even when the fuselage is 2 feet off the ground, people will be injured: particularly children, the elderly, the disabled and the infirm. So there has to be a significant risk of you dying in the cabin for us to decide to evacuate. So my advice is if you are told to get off, then just do it - forget your frigging laptop and yeah, you are selfish. And stupid.
Al Murdoch is offline  
Old 28th Mar 2014, 08:25
  #29 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Nova
Posts: 1,242
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
My guess?

Engine stall or surge at full power. Lots of bangs and flames. Engines all retarded to idle. Stall/surge successfully resolved. But some muppet passenger who was probably talking loudly, or reading his broadsheet all through the safety briefing because he/she's an oh so frequent traveller, decided they'd seen enough to panic, and opened a door. After rummaging through the overhead locker first obviously!

I'll be amazed if that's not the scenario we're dealing with here!

Any passengers thinking about taking this sort of action in future. Do be aware that in a 'crew controlled' evacuation, the engines will be shut down (switched off) BEFORE you are COMMANDED to evacuate. The reason being that jet engines have a very real capacity to suck people right through the shredders and furnace before spitting what's left out the back.

Just do exactly as you are told by the professionals rather than panic. Don't turn a non-event into a death by your utter stupidity! And any IDIOT attempting to open an overhead locker during an evacuation down slides when I'm in the cabin is looking for BIG trouble!

WATCH THE BL00DY SAFETY VIDEO/DEMO FOR THE SAKE OF THE PEOPLE AROUND YOU EVEN IF YOU HAVE NO RESPECT FOR YOUR OWN LIFE!!!!!!!
Tandemrotor is offline  
Old 28th Mar 2014, 08:28
  #30 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: London, UK
Age: 64
Posts: 103
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
There was a short clip on the BBC London news last evening. People seem to leave with commendable speed, a different impression from the still pictures posted on twitter.
The relevant footage starts at about 6m20sec on this item.
BBC iPlayer - BBC London News: 27/03/2014
(Might not play outside of UK)
ELondonPax is offline  
Old 28th Mar 2014, 09:16
  #31 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: schermoney and left front seat
Age: 57
Posts: 2,437
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
if we order an evacuation, it is absolutely the last resort

Hmmmm, looking at the pics, I don´t see any smoke or the like.

Sometimes I feel I´d be better to wait and check. The WX looks fine to me and I think the tower should have been able to see the airplane and thus give valuable info to the crew.

I´m sure the crew followed SOPs, still...there is 3 minor injuries now and IF N.4 would have spilled parts, fuel and fire, then an evac to the right side seems wrong to me and could have resulted in more injury.

Q for 146 drivers: can one see the engines from the FD ?
His dudeness is offline  
Old 28th Mar 2014, 09:30
  #32 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: germany
Posts: 31
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I would never ever grab my hand baggage if i`m holding up people un an emergency,never,
but
i always have a rucksack ( 40X30X20 ) with me and when i am in row 40,i have to wait for people in front of me to leave their seats,maybe seconds,but enough time for me to take my rucksack with me.
philip2412 is offline  
Old 28th Mar 2014, 09:43
  #33 (permalink)  

Bottums Up
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: dunnunda
Age: 66
Posts: 3,440
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
But some muppet passenger who was probably talking loudly, or reading his broadsheet all through the safety briefing because he/she's an oh so frequent traveller, decided they'd seen enough to panic, and opened a door.
Just how does a muppet on an aeroplane with no mid cabin underwing exits, open a door? Are you really suggesting the cabin crew just sat there and allowed that to happen?

As for evacuating on the starboard side, it's entirely possible and reasonable, that the tech crew on hearing an explosive sound shut the engines down and ordered an evacuation. In many airlines, it is up to the cabin crew to look out the door window, assess any visible impediment to opening the door (smoke, fire, water, obstruction) and if deemed clear, open the door and thus deploy the slide.

If the explosive sound was just a compressor stall, and there's no visible damage to the cowling in the photo at the start of the thread, then why not evacuate from the starboard side. Finally, at a guess, the CC probably wouldn't all agree on which side the explosive sound came from and would therefore rely on what they could see.
Capt Claret is offline  
Old 28th Mar 2014, 10:36
  #34 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: West Sussex
Age: 67
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
DSC810 #13Thank god there is at least some one with a realistic attitude left. You are right, and whilst we can celebrate "The Darwin's" every year, most people on that aircraft would have been intelligent enough to sum up the situation for themselves and realise that it would be better to grab their hand luggage rather than leave it and almost guarantee they loss it or have it damaged. If the Airlines and carpers on this forum want to stop this behaviour then they need to provide a more transparent process for returning the hand luggage in a timely manner (within the hour guaranteed depending of coarse on the size of the aircraft) without the aid of jobs worth and red tape excuses.
Tempestnut is offline  
Old 28th Mar 2014, 11:13
  #35 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: UK
Posts: 730
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Tempestnut, while I agree that luggage should be returned promptly, intact and complete after such events, and that doing so may help reduce morons' temptation to evacuate with their baggage, your comments condone this irresponsible and utterly selfish behaviour.

I believe that the problem is now so widespread that ICAO needs to secure mandatory prosecution of all and any passengers who do this. There are already laws in place that would cover this: "failure to comply with legal commands or instructions from crew" and "endangering the safe conduct of the flight", amongst others, and these have a two year custodial sentence in many countries.

If passengers are going to endanger others because of the inconvenience of losing the data on a laptop which has been backed up remotely, to quote and incredibly stupid example, then these idiots deserve to be locked away for as long as the law permits.

Passengers have no idea about what is happening inside or outside the aircraft, of how things work and of what risks exist. Crew don't always get it right, and the SWA pax at La Guardia were right to initiate their own evacuation, but to ignore safety demonstrations and decide that their own luggage is more valuable than others' lives is criminal and should be treated as such. I would love to see an absolutely brutal crack down on this behaviour.
Aluminium shuffler is offline  
Old 28th Mar 2014, 11:18
  #36 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: England
Posts: 1,955
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by His dudeness

Q for 146 drivers: can one see the engines from the FD ?
On a
-100 (RJ70) 1.5 engines.
-200 (RJ85) 1.0 engines.
-300 (RJ100) 0.5 engines.

- ish. Depending how hard you try.
Lord Spandex Masher is offline  
Old 28th Mar 2014, 11:18
  #37 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Nova
Posts: 1,242
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Capt Claret
Just how does a muppet on an aeroplane with no mid cabin underwing exits, open a door? Are you really suggesting the cabin crew just sat there and allowed that to happen?
It would seem you are blissfully unaware that precisely what I described has already occurred on this type before. Anyone familiar with the history of these aircraft will know it was possibly even this airframe!
it's entirely possible and reasonable, that the tech crew on hearing an explosive sound shut the engines down and ordered an evacuation.
Are you REALLY a professional pilot? If you think that's 'reasonable' you need to think again! That's absolutely NOT what we do round here!
If the explosive sound was just a compressor stall, and there's no visible damage to the cowling in the photo at the start of the thread, then why not evacuate from the starboard side. Finally, at a guess, the CC probably wouldn't all agree on which side the explosive sound came from and would therefore rely on what they could see.
It just gets worse! You clearly operate on a different planet to me.
Tandemrotor is offline  
Old 28th Mar 2014, 14:30
  #38 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: lancs.UK
Age: 77
Posts: 1,191
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
So, After the loud bangs, flame and smoke display, the FD shuts down.... the Pax sit in a silent, "dead" aorcraft and the order is given to evacuate.....I,m somewhere in the middle, Ican neither seeany smoke,or flame through the 2 open doors, nor from the windows.....the queues are shuffling towards the slides, it's apparent there is ano urgency to clear, by those already on the ground.....I assess that it will take ~30 seconds to recover my valuables, I also assess the evacuation was an over-reaction...(distinct absence of * Police*, Fire Appliances, ambulances, ground-marshalls) and i'm now 4 paces behind the person in front.....butAluminium shuffler would have me hung, drawn and quartered, because someone blindly followed an escape-routine which was a total over-reaction.

A simple surge-situation now involves all the reparations, ferry flight, cost of new slides, time out of service.......

Where there are real and urgent needs for evacuation, I'd be there with the CC, snatching bags and launching the owners onto the slides..... but this wasn. t the case....a passive, silent aircraft...you really think all the Pax are so thick they can't work it out?......OH! so it might explode in another ball of fire? real clever to deploy slides on the same side then!...YES, I'm certain the FD would know which side the malfunction was on, and where the prevailing wind was from hint...turn the a/c , if necessary, so the flames blow away from the pax-area, THEN shut down the rest of the donks.... that saves a damned sight more lives than leaving bags behind when there's no urgency.

just my opinion, of course..
cockney steve is offline  
Old 28th Mar 2014, 14:37
  #39 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Bedford, UK
Age: 70
Posts: 1,319
Received 19 Likes on 11 Posts
It's all very well for the professionals to carp on about hand luggage but it is largely a problem of the industry's own making. What is wrong with putting luggage in the hold, downsizing the over-large overheads and freeing us pax from watching the idiots trying to lift their over sized bags above their heads and cc quietly fuming at the disorganised free for all of it.
Mr Optimistic is offline  
Old 28th Mar 2014, 16:58
  #40 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: A little south of the "Black Sheep" brewery
Posts: 434
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Aluminium shuffler,
I believe that the problem is now so widespread that ICAO needs to secure mandatory prosecution of all and any passengers who do this. There are already laws in place that would cover this: "failure to comply with legal commands or instructions from crew" and "endangering the safe conduct of the flight", amongst others, and these have a two year custodial sentence in many countries.

If passengers are going to endanger others because of the inconvenience of losing the data on a laptop which has been backed up remotely, to quote and incredibly stupid example, then these idiots deserve to be locked away for as long as the law permits.

Passengers have no idea about what is happening inside or outside the aircraft, of how things work and of what risks exist. Crew don't always get it right, and the SWA pax at La Guardia were right to initiate their own evacuation, but to ignore safety demonstrations and decide that their own luggage is more valuable than others' lives is criminal and should be treated as such. I would love to see an absolutely brutal crack down on this behaviour.
Absolutely spot on!!

Except for one point: Why limit it to only two years custody? Even more would be appropriate for the selfish moron who feels that his poxy laptop is worth more than the life of the people that he is obstructing in order to retrieve it!

No matter how clever you think you are and no matter how many times you think that you've heard it before, pay attention to the safety demo. For take-off and landing have your passport and wallet in your pockets, have your shoes on and fastened, and have sensible clothing for the first 5 minutes or so outside. When you are told to 'Evacuate', don't try to be clever and second-guess the situation, just get the **** out as fast as you can!! Someone with a lot more knowledge of the situation than you has made that decision. The only people that the above doesn't apply to is infants; once they have their own seats they should be introduced to this process.

One or two well publicised prosecutions should be enough to make those selfish morons start to pay proper attention and act sensibly.

There are a lot of people putting an enormous amount of effort into making this form of transport so very, very safe; those who wilfully chose to go against safety instructions (like retrieve a laptop) and potentially endanger the carefully reasoned process should be prosecuted. No more trying to be clever, if you want to travel on the safest form of transport, then when those who know more than you about it perceive there to be sufficient risk, just shut up and do as you have been told.
Trossie is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.