China Airlines B737 Fire at Okinawa
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Munich
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Would the fuel in this area be under pressure from the weight of remaining fuel under the influence of the slope of the wing? Is the hole behind the inboard or outboard leading edge slats?
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Slaving away in front of multiple LCDs, somewhere in the USA
Age: 69
Posts: 174
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
>>>Is the hole behind the inboard or outboard leading edge slats?
Outboard; the devices inboard are not L/E slats but are Krueger flaps...
Outboard; the devices inboard are not L/E slats but are Krueger flaps...
foxtrot xray
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Midwest USA
Posts: 84
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bolt Falling Off
It's somewhat hard to tell for certain from the photograph but it appears that the intact bolt head and nut are visible. If so, obviously the bolt did not "fall off" for lack of tightening. unless the mechanic's name was Houdini. Under this scenario, two possibilities present: it was a stray bolt left in a cavity after removal during mainteneance which subsequently got jammed up in the works and was forced through skin duing operation of the flaps/slats, or the members that the bolt was holding together failed under load tearing out the bolt hole(s) and allowing the intact fastener to become free. In the latter case, the bolt could have been propelled by the same forces and penetrated the skin(like a bullet) or simply fell into a spot where subsequent operation of the works forced it through the skin.
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Japan
Posts: 96
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Reply to A310
The NHK News tonight provided a possible explanation given by the Investigators, but it is a bit hard to put into words.
The bolt in question has several nuts secured along its length, two large outer nuts and a smaller central nut. Next to both of the the large nuts there should be metal washers and these washers fit against the slat mechanism. The current point of investigation is focusing on the large nut nearest the end of the bolt thread. If this came loose then the smaller central nut can pass through the slat mechanism and the bolt falls free. It is this small nut that we can observe in the photo, not the larger outer nut that should secure the bolt in place.
The investigators are now checking to find out if all the washers and nuts can be accounted for in the wreckage.
I hope that makes some sense and it is as closely as I can describe the NHK report, although I admit there does not appear to be much spare thread visible on the photo provided by Ifix.
PTH
The bolt in question has several nuts secured along its length, two large outer nuts and a smaller central nut. Next to both of the the large nuts there should be metal washers and these washers fit against the slat mechanism. The current point of investigation is focusing on the large nut nearest the end of the bolt thread. If this came loose then the smaller central nut can pass through the slat mechanism and the bolt falls free. It is this small nut that we can observe in the photo, not the larger outer nut that should secure the bolt in place.
The investigators are now checking to find out if all the washers and nuts can be accounted for in the wreckage.
I hope that makes some sense and it is as closely as I can describe the NHK report, although I admit there does not appear to be much spare thread visible on the photo provided by Ifix.
PTH
foxtrot xray
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Midwest USA
Posts: 84
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PTH
Thanks that is another scenario but like you I doubt there is enough thread showing for that. It would be nice to see the original photo instead of these copies.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: the City by the Bay
Posts: 547
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: No longer in Hong kong
Age: 75
Posts: 199
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's interesting, the mind set of humans (and some animals I suppose), there seems to be a slight reluctance on the part of the early exiters at the front right side slide, to get going, but once they have, then people seem to be streaming down. Maybe if we have any psychiatrists (I'm sure we have many of the amateur variety) they might be able to explain this.
It's interesting, the mind set of humans (and some animals I suppose), there seems to be a slight reluctance on the part of the early exiters at the front right side slide, to get going, but once they have, then people seem to be streaming down. Maybe if we have any psychiatrists (I'm sure we have many of the amateur variety) they might be able to explain this.
The reluctance of the first is easily overcome as the pressure builds up from behind,
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: No longer in Hong kong
Age: 75
Posts: 199
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quite a good clip that one, note the brave soul with the hand held extinguisher at about sec :35, and then immediately after an explosion which rocks the starboard wing.
Iomapaseo: I hadn't thought about having a FA down first, but it's obviously the way to go, still a bit of reluctance on the part of the first pax pair to slide. Understandable I guess as it's not the way that most people are expecting to arrive at their destination.
Iomapaseo: I hadn't thought about having a FA down first, but it's obviously the way to go, still a bit of reluctance on the part of the first pax pair to slide. Understandable I guess as it's not the way that most people are expecting to arrive at their destination.
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: In a box, ready for shipping...
Posts: 717
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From my experience as a FA, crew are not meant to evacuate themselves first...pax first, crew last (or until it's unsafe to remain on board)...
This is from an Australian perspective, however. Asian airlines may have different perspectives/policies in regards to evacuation procedures for their cabin crew.
Well done to the crew for getting everyone out safe and well. It could all have ended differently.
This is from an Australian perspective, however. Asian airlines may have different perspectives/policies in regards to evacuation procedures for their cabin crew.
Well done to the crew for getting everyone out safe and well. It could all have ended differently.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: the City by the Bay
Posts: 547
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
China Airlines ignored warning signals???
Per Ardua ad Astraeus
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 18,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quite confusing! They talk of 'right wing' and then 'No1 left slat' which is outboard on the left wing!
The consensus appears to be the right wing, so I am assuming they should be referring to no5 (inboard) slat. Anyone know for sure? Certainly if 5000kg fuel (2500/2500) is correct this part of the wing would have been 'wet'. Then wing around No 1 slat would probably have been empty.
Of course it could all be a red herring!
The consensus appears to be the right wing, so I am assuming they should be referring to no5 (inboard) slat. Anyone know for sure? Certainly if 5000kg fuel (2500/2500) is correct this part of the wing would have been 'wet'. Then wing around No 1 slat would probably have been empty.
Of course it could all be a red herring!
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: the City by the Bay
Posts: 547
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The jet was well on fire by the time the evac started:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=tHsKltfO-...related&search=
That was why I was wondering if the flight crew had a lot of systems still CONNECTED (if anything really was still working) to shut down or perhaps couldve just gotten out just a bit faster. And I was wondering if the evac shut down procedures could be streamlined somehow. Or systems made easier to shutdown.
As it was they cut it really really fine (not saying they did anything wrong here) . I dont know if evac through the window ought to be SOP or should really be Last Ditch. And thats why I suggested they should perhaps exit right behind the purser from the front slide. The clip showed they couldve in this case, but they may have kept the FD door closed so therefore couldnt see exactly.
Sorry if some of my previous comments seemed unkind, actually I tip my hat off to the entire crew. And I never meant to seem to be mocking them. Keeping super cool and getting things done. The results speak for themselves.
One passenger in the clip said soon as they stopped some people smelled a fire and within another two minutes the stewardesses were announcing that there was an emergency and everyone should listen to instructions and then the evac began.
Another clip made by a passenger after the evac showed a jet taking off and claimed that the airport was still operating and planes were taking off.
This may really have been the ONE jet that may already have been lined up to take off right at the runway. It was clear that the airport was shut down for awhile.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=X-M2_0Zxi...related&search=
Looks like as well that slides on both sides were deployed (at least you can see that the left front slide was deployed. But I didnt really see people using them.
p.s. The man with the fire extinguisher was very brave but should really have not attempted to put out such a raging engine fire with just that. And he escaped with his life with seconds to spare really.
edit: on review of the clips did see people exiting via front and rear slides on both sides of the aircraft.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=tHsKltfO-...related&search=
That was why I was wondering if the flight crew had a lot of systems still CONNECTED (if anything really was still working) to shut down or perhaps couldve just gotten out just a bit faster. And I was wondering if the evac shut down procedures could be streamlined somehow. Or systems made easier to shutdown.
As it was they cut it really really fine (not saying they did anything wrong here) . I dont know if evac through the window ought to be SOP or should really be Last Ditch. And thats why I suggested they should perhaps exit right behind the purser from the front slide. The clip showed they couldve in this case, but they may have kept the FD door closed so therefore couldnt see exactly.
Sorry if some of my previous comments seemed unkind, actually I tip my hat off to the entire crew. And I never meant to seem to be mocking them. Keeping super cool and getting things done. The results speak for themselves.
One passenger in the clip said soon as they stopped some people smelled a fire and within another two minutes the stewardesses were announcing that there was an emergency and everyone should listen to instructions and then the evac began.
Another clip made by a passenger after the evac showed a jet taking off and claimed that the airport was still operating and planes were taking off.
This may really have been the ONE jet that may already have been lined up to take off right at the runway. It was clear that the airport was shut down for awhile.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=X-M2_0Zxi...related&search=
Looks like as well that slides on both sides were deployed (at least you can see that the left front slide was deployed. But I didnt really see people using them.
p.s. The man with the fire extinguisher was very brave but should really have not attempted to put out such a raging engine fire with just that. And he escaped with his life with seconds to spare really.
edit: on review of the clips did see people exiting via front and rear slides on both sides of the aircraft.
Last edited by armchairpilot94116; 26th Aug 2007 at 08:33.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: washington,dc
Posts: 486
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Airline flying might be considered quite safe, and rightly so.
But, we must always be on guard for the unusual and unlikely form of emergencies like this one. Just the other day a hot air balloon caught fire in British Columbia.
We've all been there. Routine flight, either a quick turn or just glad to be done for the day, who is looking for a fire?
Many airlines are using the cheapest poorly trained people around the planes now, instead of well trained mechanics (read engineers for the non USA readers).
I think this was a wake up call, to remind us to always be on guard until we have left the plane in someone else's hands, or secured the plane.
That everyone got out shows that someone did something right. Bravo to the eagle eyed ground person (give him a raise), and the crew that heeded his advice.
I also think that part of the equation will be the cooking off of vapors in the center tank by the external fire. that last explosion seemed big.
Back in the piston days, those big wheeled fire extinguishers were quite handy to have around...that might want to be revisited.
The 737 evacuation checklist is the first item on the cover of our QRH and takes very little time to accomplish. (wondering if I will be banned for this post?)
Bomarc...nuclear tipped.
But, we must always be on guard for the unusual and unlikely form of emergencies like this one. Just the other day a hot air balloon caught fire in British Columbia.
We've all been there. Routine flight, either a quick turn or just glad to be done for the day, who is looking for a fire?
Many airlines are using the cheapest poorly trained people around the planes now, instead of well trained mechanics (read engineers for the non USA readers).
I think this was a wake up call, to remind us to always be on guard until we have left the plane in someone else's hands, or secured the plane.
That everyone got out shows that someone did something right. Bravo to the eagle eyed ground person (give him a raise), and the crew that heeded his advice.
I also think that part of the equation will be the cooking off of vapors in the center tank by the external fire. that last explosion seemed big.
Back in the piston days, those big wheeled fire extinguishers were quite handy to have around...that might want to be revisited.
The 737 evacuation checklist is the first item on the cover of our QRH and takes very little time to accomplish. (wondering if I will be banned for this post?)
Bomarc...nuclear tipped.
Paxing All Over The World
armchairpilot94116
The report will tell us. All you have to do is wait two years. 
It is possible that the severity of the incident might not have been known and so an a/c, perhaps already lined up on the active, was allowed to depart. Equally, in one of the videos that was linked in an earlier post, I noted a JAL landing as the event developed. That, too, may have already been on finals and the severity of the incident not yet known.
And I was wondering if the evac shut down procedures could be streamlined somehow. Or systems made easier to shut down.
Another clip made by a passenger after the evac showed a jet taking off and claimed that the airport was still operating and planes were taking off.
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: near EDDF
Posts: 775
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And here is the Emergency Airworthiness Directive:
2007-18-51
2007-18-51
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Global
Posts: 460
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well so much for “Guanxi” and those “friendly” Japanese “investigating” engineers........
Thanks IFix, I was wondering if this would end with an AD or an SB. It looks like the insurance companies are going to give Mr Boeing a kicking.
Thanks IFix, I was wondering if this would end with an AD or an SB. It looks like the insurance companies are going to give Mr Boeing a kicking.
Paxing All Over The World
For those of us not familiar with AD documents and their procedures, it would seem that this is aimed more at maintenance than at the particular manufacturer? I am not interested in a pro/anti of either of the major manufacturers but am seeking to verify the statement by ihd
If the component Slat Rack Downstop Assembly has been working fine on numerous airframes for some years. Now, it seems, that one of these components has failed in an airframe recently out of maintenance? Or am I stringing too many things together at too early a stage?
If maintenance was at fault then it is not, immediately, Mr Boeing's fault.
It looks like the insurance companies are going to give Mr Boeing a kicking
If maintenance was at fault then it is not, immediately, Mr Boeing's fault.