Is safe to have those devices
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2002
Location: still in bed
Posts: 190
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is safe to have those devices
During my recent tripto Portland (By a NW A330 er) i noticed again behind the last Business class seats row 5 or 6 oxygen canisters.
I guess that in E.R. flights the A330 chemical canister is not longer legal so there is this system implementation to ensure longer Oxygen supply.
My question: Is safe to have those devices so easelly exposed to an accidental or intentional treath? I hate to say but with all the fuss to the passengers in therm of counterterroristic safety is noth all this pathetic when you see 5-6 canister easy for anybody to be sabotaged on board?
next time I will send you a picture.
I guess that in E.R. flights the A330 chemical canister is not longer legal so there is this system implementation to ensure longer Oxygen supply.
My question: Is safe to have those devices so easelly exposed to an accidental or intentional treath? I hate to say but with all the fuss to the passengers in therm of counterterroristic safety is noth all this pathetic when you see 5-6 canister easy for anybody to be sabotaged on board?
next time I will send you a picture.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: uk
Posts: 1,266
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nearly all aircraft have supplemental oxygen canisters on board, they're for the crew or in case of passenger medical requirements, not to supplement the pax oxy generators.
There are a number of items needed on board aircraft which have potential use as a weapon, fortunately the main threats aircrew around the world face daily are not terrorists (despite what the media would have you believe) but good, old-fashioned medical emergencies, technical malfunctions, disruptive passengers and the threat that we may make a mistake in operating the aircraft.
So some bits of equipment are rather important, whether or not a paranoid Daily Mail reader may consider them a threat.
There are a number of items needed on board aircraft which have potential use as a weapon, fortunately the main threats aircrew around the world face daily are not terrorists (despite what the media would have you believe) but good, old-fashioned medical emergencies, technical malfunctions, disruptive passengers and the threat that we may make a mistake in operating the aircraft.
So some bits of equipment are rather important, whether or not a paranoid Daily Mail reader may consider them a threat.
Join Date: May 2003
Location: eastmidlands
Age: 62
Posts: 41
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oxygen!!!
I agree with both the above post's regards the use and possible misuse of such items.
Yes, everything has to be kept in prospective!
However, these cyclinders potentially pose a problem so should not be lying around in the cabin they should be stored securely in a designated area. Perhaps with a break away door for emergency use only i.e. out of sight out of mind and perhaps with a cabin alarm to alert the cabin staff should anyone try to access them except in a real crisis.
I think having them on display and maybe not secured poses a few questions regards safety and security?
After all I was made to put my two son's bears in the hold one year coming back from florida long before this all kicked off and an empty water gun they were distraught!!! I was very angry and gave the sanford check in staff a hard Paddington stare but they were having none of it (Jobs worths).
Perhaps they thought the bears might kick off due to lack of honey on offer on the sweet trolly!
Yes, everything has to be kept in prospective!
However, these cyclinders potentially pose a problem so should not be lying around in the cabin they should be stored securely in a designated area. Perhaps with a break away door for emergency use only i.e. out of sight out of mind and perhaps with a cabin alarm to alert the cabin staff should anyone try to access them except in a real crisis.
I think having them on display and maybe not secured poses a few questions regards safety and security?
After all I was made to put my two son's bears in the hold one year coming back from florida long before this all kicked off and an empty water gun they were distraught!!! I was very angry and gave the sanford check in staff a hard Paddington stare but they were having none of it (Jobs worths).
Perhaps they thought the bears might kick off due to lack of honey on offer on the sweet trolly!
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2002
Location: still in bed
Posts: 190
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
this is not the point gentlemen.
I post the issue because I do not understand why they don't hide in places better than behind he seats the extra oxygen system.
Maybe I did not make it clear.Sorry.
A 330 is designed with chemical canisters and the 330 e.r. for some rules can't rely on those canisters only therefore NW have add a suplementary oxygen supply system.
My question:
is safe to have this suplementary system just behind a seats row ? In my opinion Not.
Pls do not misanderstand : I am happy for the system! but just i dispute the location. Have any of you noticed this?
or is just a North West configuration?
I post the issue because I do not understand why they don't hide in places better than behind he seats the extra oxygen system.
Maybe I did not make it clear.Sorry.
A 330 is designed with chemical canisters and the 330 e.r. for some rules can't rely on those canisters only therefore NW have add a suplementary oxygen supply system.
My question:
is safe to have this suplementary system just behind a seats row ? In my opinion Not.
Pls do not misanderstand : I am happy for the system! but just i dispute the location. Have any of you noticed this?
or is just a North West configuration?
You have made the assumption that the oxygen is supplemental oxygen, this may not be so. You have questioned the safety of having oxygen cylinders exposed, I suggest you ask the FAA (the licensing authority for NWA) rather than an open forum, that is if you really want to know a definitive answer.
It is only my opinion, but, I think that they do not replace the chemical generators for emergency oxygen. I think they are theraputic oxygen bottles or for crew use in decompression situations. The siting could be reconsidered, why not ask NWA if this is possible? Let us know what you achieve.
It is only my opinion, but, I think that they do not replace the chemical generators for emergency oxygen. I think they are theraputic oxygen bottles or for crew use in decompression situations. The siting could be reconsidered, why not ask NWA if this is possible? Let us know what you achieve.
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Sweden
Posts: 74
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
[/QUOTE]I post the issue because I do not understand why they don't hide in places better than behind he seats the extra oxygen system.[/QUOTE]
The o2 tanks are not hidden because they need to be easily accessible in an emergency, for example a smoke filled cabin. To start messing around with locks and switches takes time in an emergency, the way it is now, the crew can just start counting rows or feel their way to the end of the seat where the o2 canisters are.
[/QUOTE]A 330 is designed with chemical canisters and the 330 e.r. for some rules can't rely on those canisters only therefore NW have add a suplementary oxygen supply system.?[/QUOTE]
I think we are comparing apples and oranges here. If I am not mistaken, the chemical o2 system is stationary and for the use of the sitting passenger, the moveable o2 tanks are for the cabin crew to use in an emergency for moving around in the cabin doing his/her duty as a flight attendant. It can also be used in a medical emergemcy like it was stated earlier in this thread.
The o2 tanks are not hidden because they need to be easily accessible in an emergency, for example a smoke filled cabin. To start messing around with locks and switches takes time in an emergency, the way it is now, the crew can just start counting rows or feel their way to the end of the seat where the o2 canisters are.
[/QUOTE]A 330 is designed with chemical canisters and the 330 e.r. for some rules can't rely on those canisters only therefore NW have add a suplementary oxygen supply system.?[/QUOTE]
I think we are comparing apples and oranges here. If I am not mistaken, the chemical o2 system is stationary and for the use of the sitting passenger, the moveable o2 tanks are for the cabin crew to use in an emergency for moving around in the cabin doing his/her duty as a flight attendant. It can also be used in a medical emergemcy like it was stated earlier in this thread.
Last edited by Catans; 6th Sep 2006 at 14:26. Reason: formatting
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Wor Yerm
Age: 68
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rough guess is that to do some real damage with O2 or the bottles it comes in, you would have to REALLY lucky. The flow rate might be enough to do some damage, but in order to really threaten the aircraft, you would have to be doing weird things for so long and in such an obvious fashion you would end up explaining for the rest of the flight, to both cabin crew and other pax, that you are not a threat to the aircraft.
Personally, I recon the FAA and NWA have considered the carriage and location of supplemental oxygen and it is there because it poses very little risk but is optimally placed for when it is required.
PM
Personally, I recon the FAA and NWA have considered the carriage and location of supplemental oxygen and it is there because it poses very little risk but is optimally placed for when it is required.
PM
Last edited by Piltdown Man; 10th Sep 2006 at 08:35. Reason: Missed word. (Poor poof reading?)
