Ryanair Loss of Pressurisation 25th Aug
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Benahavis, Malaga, Spain
Posts: 86
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As a SLF, and regular flyer AGP<>EDI with GSM, I have never experienced such an emergency incident, albeit once we had to fly "low and slow" to Bournemouth to sort out a door seal problem noticed shortly after take-off from EDI.
With regard to this incident and indeed the O2 "candles" in question, am I right in thinking there is only around 26 seconds of oxygen available from the inherent chemical reaction - hence another reason for the rapid but controlled descent!!??
I got this gem of info from "Aircraft Investigation" so it must be true - right??
With regard to this incident and indeed the O2 "candles" in question, am I right in thinking there is only around 26 seconds of oxygen available from the inherent chemical reaction - hence another reason for the rapid but controlled descent!!??
I got this gem of info from "Aircraft Investigation" so it must be true - right??
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: London, UK
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
labrador pup - The hold air comes from the cabin so a depressurised cabin would mean a depressurised hold. So I would expect any animals to lose consciousness. Whether or not they survive would depend on how quickly the pilots can descend to an altitude at which there's sufficient breathable air for that animal.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 130
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Are passengers at fault?
Hi
I waited before I'd fitted my tin hat to post. I'm expecting some incoming....I also apologise in advance for repeating some points previously made. On second thoughts, no, I won't apologise.
A small piece of background; I am a PPL(H) and have worked on aircraft, fast jet, helis and multi-jets, for about half of my working life so I understand all that has gone before. I am now in computer software (bear with me, it is germaine to the discussion).
First point. SLF pays the pros wages. End of. The customer is king. As frequent SLF, I do object to the way some in the industry seem to view me.
Second point. When I started in software, I used to do the same thing. If my users couldn't use my software/broke it/didn't remember my instructions to them it was their fault. Since then, the industry, and me along with it, has matured. Now, I actively look for areas where my users struggle and attempt to address this by revisiting the design, better understanding which specific areas cause problems, improving the documentation, trying to preempt what users might do etc. This paradigm shift has caused me to see the problem as mine.
My tuppence is that perhaps the aviation industry might benefit from similar thinking in discussions such as this? It happens in the cockpit. Why not for your most precious cargo?
A case to illustrate the point is the bizarre situation where each airframe may have a different method of opening the overwing exits and you rely on untrained SLF, whose psyche you nothing of, as a fundemental part of the EV? Is it beyond the wit of man to come up with a new approach? (incidentally, I brief myself that if that geezer by the door doesn't get it open, I bl**dy well will
)
I do happen to listen to briefings with a half cocked ear in case something has changed because, like many here, I could do the demos myself - and probably understand far more what's behind the demo than your average cabin crew. I also always count the seat backs between me and the exits. So please, a plea to the pros, "seek first to understand and only then to be understood".
Had I been on this cab, I would not be panicking (just yet) as I would know that the oxy gens where working and why we were "plummeting" towards the ground. The only niggle in the back of my head would be about structural integrity but bugger all I can do about that so back to the G&Ts.
How about a little respect back?
Finally, hats off to the pros in whose hands I frequently place my trust and to all crews who have had to deal with any incident such as this.
Simon
I waited before I'd fitted my tin hat to post. I'm expecting some incoming....I also apologise in advance for repeating some points previously made. On second thoughts, no, I won't apologise.
A small piece of background; I am a PPL(H) and have worked on aircraft, fast jet, helis and multi-jets, for about half of my working life so I understand all that has gone before. I am now in computer software (bear with me, it is germaine to the discussion).
First point. SLF pays the pros wages. End of. The customer is king. As frequent SLF, I do object to the way some in the industry seem to view me.
Second point. When I started in software, I used to do the same thing. If my users couldn't use my software/broke it/didn't remember my instructions to them it was their fault. Since then, the industry, and me along with it, has matured. Now, I actively look for areas where my users struggle and attempt to address this by revisiting the design, better understanding which specific areas cause problems, improving the documentation, trying to preempt what users might do etc. This paradigm shift has caused me to see the problem as mine.
My tuppence is that perhaps the aviation industry might benefit from similar thinking in discussions such as this? It happens in the cockpit. Why not for your most precious cargo?
A case to illustrate the point is the bizarre situation where each airframe may have a different method of opening the overwing exits and you rely on untrained SLF, whose psyche you nothing of, as a fundemental part of the EV? Is it beyond the wit of man to come up with a new approach? (incidentally, I brief myself that if that geezer by the door doesn't get it open, I bl**dy well will
)I do happen to listen to briefings with a half cocked ear in case something has changed because, like many here, I could do the demos myself - and probably understand far more what's behind the demo than your average cabin crew. I also always count the seat backs between me and the exits. So please, a plea to the pros, "seek first to understand and only then to be understood".
Had I been on this cab, I would not be panicking (just yet
) as I would know that the oxy gens where working and why we were "plummeting" towards the ground. The only niggle in the back of my head would be about structural integrity but bugger all I can do about that so back to the G&Ts.How about a little respect back?
Finally, hats off to the pros in whose hands I frequently place my trust and to all crews who have had to deal with any incident such as this.
Simon
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: London, UK
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hombre - I thought it would be more like 12 minutes. Bear in mind that long-haul flights over high terrain need sufficient time to clear high ground in order to descend to a breathable level. Any aircraft flying over such terrain should have their oxygen systems certified accordingly.
Hombre
It' certainly a lot more than 26 seconds but its difficult to give an exact number...The actual time is going to depend on the aircraft type, altitude, and in the case of a system using tanked oxygen wether the tanks are fully topped up and how many passengers are on board...it's certainly a case of several minutes rather than seconds.
As Paddington has mentioned Long Haul Aircraft operating over high Terrain have to be equipped with systems that can cope with extended flight with the passengers on oxygen - in which case you may be talking about having an hours supply or more at lower altitudes
As Paddington has mentioned Long Haul Aircraft operating over high Terrain have to be equipped with systems that can cope with extended flight with the passengers on oxygen - in which case you may be talking about having an hours supply or more at lower altitudes
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Essex, UK
Age: 57
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PA announcements
Regarding (automated) PA announcements on decompression events...
I wonder how effective this would be anyway in reduced air pressure. Anyone know facts/figures on effectiveness of sound transmission in reduced air pressure?
I honestly think, in such situations, you're never going to please everyone. Best thing seems to be, for ALL crew to do as trained, mitigate the emergency and get the aircraft down to breathable altitude. When at reduced altitude and reduced workload, give full explanation including reasons why there was no PA announcement whilst performing emerg decent etc.
I'm sure you'd get everyone's attention during such an announcement, and the right words and explanation would go a long way to cutting out passengers fear, indignation etc, whether it's warranted or not.
Most will accept the explanation and see the sense of it - those that don't couldn't get p1ssedin a brewery, and would find fault if they won the lottery, so don't waste energy on them you'll never get it right for those folks.
I wonder how effective this would be anyway in reduced air pressure. Anyone know facts/figures on effectiveness of sound transmission in reduced air pressure?
I honestly think, in such situations, you're never going to please everyone. Best thing seems to be, for ALL crew to do as trained, mitigate the emergency and get the aircraft down to breathable altitude. When at reduced altitude and reduced workload, give full explanation including reasons why there was no PA announcement whilst performing emerg decent etc.
I'm sure you'd get everyone's attention during such an announcement, and the right words and explanation would go a long way to cutting out passengers fear, indignation etc, whether it's warranted or not.
Most will accept the explanation and see the sense of it - those that don't couldn't get p1ssedin a brewery, and would find fault if they won the lottery, so don't waste energy on them you'll never get it right for those folks.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Cartoon strip
Posts: 181
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Isn't the Daily Telly brilliant:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/telegraph...-l_796317a.jpg
Even if I knew nought about flying, the concepts here are so well presented that I think my goldfish Spot would understand this piccy quite well.
Maybe they should do a series of similarly informative graphics. Suggested titles include:
1. Jonny combs his hair.
2. Timmy goes for a poo.
3. Jenny eats her cornflakes and then has some toast.
It's heartening to know that after 3 years going to graphics college, a graduate can pick up a worth while job in the Daily Telegraph putting into pictures what words could never describe.
Hat's off to the Telly and all those other unsung journalists for bringing us the stories and pictures that really matter.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/telegraph...-l_796317a.jpg
Even if I knew nought about flying, the concepts here are so well presented that I think my goldfish Spot would understand this piccy quite well.
Maybe they should do a series of similarly informative graphics. Suggested titles include:
1. Jonny combs his hair.
2. Timmy goes for a poo.
3. Jenny eats her cornflakes and then has some toast.
It's heartening to know that after 3 years going to graphics college, a graduate can pick up a worth while job in the Daily Telegraph putting into pictures what words could never describe.
Hat's off to the Telly and all those other unsung journalists for bringing us the stories and pictures that really matter.
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: In my head
Posts: 694
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think we've pandered enough to the media distraction of MO'L v. Hadow now. Too many professionals here are fueling it. I think this thread should be quartered immediately.
All the posts banging on about how if passengers listened to the initial Ryanair briefing they'd be informed enough to know how their masks work, are all wrong. They can go. Excise them please, moderators.
The Ryanair briefing tells people to pull down the mask fully. Courtesy only of itsresidualmate in this thread, those of us that have listened to the Ryanair briefing several hundred times in order to extract the last drop of survivability out of it, finally know what 'fully' means.
As for whether the rebreather bag is expected to inflate or not we have only learned about that today from SNS3Guppy in the other thread about why the bag doesn't necessarily inflate. Until I read this thread I'd never even considered the problem of any rebreather bag possibly being tight flat after my first few breaths.
I am not aware of anything in a Ryanair safety briefing about what to expect from any bag attached to any mask, merely a phrase counselling me to breathe normally.
So the reactions from the passengers, including Mr Hadow, who is no doubt used to trying to make sense out of his predicament, are all completely as someone like me would expect. Take them as complaints if you will. That says more about you than them. I take them as observations offered to those wishing to listen. I recommend listening.
On the other hand, the reactions of many of the RYR fleet pilots on this thread are rather surprising, I feel. One might have hoped RYR pilots are open-minded individuals first, and Ryanair employees second. Actually the ire directed at Mr Hadow is plain silly, as are the silly comments left on his website. Without his comments about the rebreather bag, no-one, including me, would have realised there is a potential communication problem about how to use a rebreathing mask if you've never used one before.
The "congratulations to the crew on a job well done" posts can also be excised I think. The "(anonymous) condolences to all those affected" are often rather diluting of real sentiment and unnecessary on the fatal accident threads, and get pruned. So the applause bit from people who really do not know anything about the pilots in this case other than the fact they were the pilots is about as perplexing as clapping on landing.
Anyway, unless you now better as an insider, congrats to the crew is all a bit premature don't you think? How do we know they didn't slip up and misconfigure or misinterpret something prior to the masks dropping? We don't yet, do we?
Anyway, the biggest disappointment in the whole thread is that the main question remains almost completely unacknowledged.
Never mind the halycyon days when there were 17 masks for 90 passengers and flying was risky business. Ryanair 737-800s cruise around eleven kilometres high. No-one can remain conscious up there for more than a faction of a minute without a full life support system.
It's not just a bus with a bit of airconditioning. The life support system was evidently thought to have failed or thought to have been compromised. Why please? How on earth did it happen?
I have said it before, but it needs re-emphasising, I think: There have been too many pressurisation incidents. I really don't think we should be seeing the backstop of emergency descent used quite so often.
I think it's interesting we've now seen it on a fleet as standard and one would hope constant as the RYR fleet upon which, The Real Slim Shady has quite rightly been laudibly telling us recently, they have an excellent automatic 24/7 self diagnostics 'phone home' telemetry(?) system which communicates constantly with a central station called 'Maintrol'(?) reporting the health of various aircraft systems irrespective of any crew reports.
Are we therefore considering a sudden and manufacturer's or maintainer's completely unpredicted failure here, or the knock-on from a known fault that was deferred according to rules which allowed it?
All the posts banging on about how if passengers listened to the initial Ryanair briefing they'd be informed enough to know how their masks work, are all wrong. They can go. Excise them please, moderators.
The Ryanair briefing tells people to pull down the mask fully. Courtesy only of itsresidualmate in this thread, those of us that have listened to the Ryanair briefing several hundred times in order to extract the last drop of survivability out of it, finally know what 'fully' means.
As for whether the rebreather bag is expected to inflate or not we have only learned about that today from SNS3Guppy in the other thread about why the bag doesn't necessarily inflate. Until I read this thread I'd never even considered the problem of any rebreather bag possibly being tight flat after my first few breaths.
I am not aware of anything in a Ryanair safety briefing about what to expect from any bag attached to any mask, merely a phrase counselling me to breathe normally.
So the reactions from the passengers, including Mr Hadow, who is no doubt used to trying to make sense out of his predicament, are all completely as someone like me would expect. Take them as complaints if you will. That says more about you than them. I take them as observations offered to those wishing to listen. I recommend listening.
On the other hand, the reactions of many of the RYR fleet pilots on this thread are rather surprising, I feel. One might have hoped RYR pilots are open-minded individuals first, and Ryanair employees second. Actually the ire directed at Mr Hadow is plain silly, as are the silly comments left on his website. Without his comments about the rebreather bag, no-one, including me, would have realised there is a potential communication problem about how to use a rebreathing mask if you've never used one before.
The "congratulations to the crew on a job well done" posts can also be excised I think. The "(anonymous) condolences to all those affected" are often rather diluting of real sentiment and unnecessary on the fatal accident threads, and get pruned. So the applause bit from people who really do not know anything about the pilots in this case other than the fact they were the pilots is about as perplexing as clapping on landing.
Anyway, unless you now better as an insider, congrats to the crew is all a bit premature don't you think? How do we know they didn't slip up and misconfigure or misinterpret something prior to the masks dropping? We don't yet, do we?
Anyway, the biggest disappointment in the whole thread is that the main question remains almost completely unacknowledged.
Never mind the halycyon days when there were 17 masks for 90 passengers and flying was risky business. Ryanair 737-800s cruise around eleven kilometres high. No-one can remain conscious up there for more than a faction of a minute without a full life support system.
It's not just a bus with a bit of airconditioning. The life support system was evidently thought to have failed or thought to have been compromised. Why please? How on earth did it happen?
I have said it before, but it needs re-emphasising, I think: There have been too many pressurisation incidents. I really don't think we should be seeing the backstop of emergency descent used quite so often.
I think it's interesting we've now seen it on a fleet as standard and one would hope constant as the RYR fleet upon which, The Real Slim Shady has quite rightly been laudibly telling us recently, they have an excellent automatic 24/7 self diagnostics 'phone home' telemetry(?) system which communicates constantly with a central station called 'Maintrol'(?) reporting the health of various aircraft systems irrespective of any crew reports.
Are we therefore considering a sudden and manufacturer's or maintainer's completely unpredicted failure here, or the knock-on from a known fault that was deferred according to rules which allowed it?
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Ireland
Posts: 627
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not that is funny and in part is the explanation as to why there has been such a fuss over this trivial incident. The Ryanair factor. We all hate Ryanair. Even I think I do despite the fact that I've yet to have a negative incident with them and many of my friends are Ryanair pilots. Bit illogical that.
But as slip and turn (I think) is saying. Why haven't we discussed the reason for the depressurisation in the first place?
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Haute Vienne France
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
According to this report in the French press
www.lepopulaire.fr - Grand Limoges - atterrissage d urgence a bellegarde video
the Torygraph map is wrong.
The aircraft depressurised 120 kms SW of Limoges over Bergerac. The crew had the option of landing either at Bordeaux or Limoges. The crew were more familiar with the layout at Limoges so turned back.
A Spanish passenger is reported as coping with the experience with less alarm than the intrepid explorer. He says that the oxygen masks dropped, the plane quickly descended, there was no panic and the plane landed without problem.
It's interesting that a French regional newspaper can apparently report this incident with more authority than the combined might of BBC and the UK national press.
www.lepopulaire.fr - Grand Limoges - atterrissage d urgence a bellegarde video
the Torygraph map is wrong.
The aircraft depressurised 120 kms SW of Limoges over Bergerac. The crew had the option of landing either at Bordeaux or Limoges. The crew were more familiar with the layout at Limoges so turned back.
A Spanish passenger is reported as coping with the experience with less alarm than the intrepid explorer. He says that the oxygen masks dropped, the plane quickly descended, there was no panic and the plane landed without problem.
It's interesting that a French regional newspaper can apparently report this incident with more authority than the combined might of BBC and the UK national press.
slip and Turn
OK, it was interesting to hear Mr Hadow's reaction - it gives us some insight into the mindset of the travelling public. The problem I and I think many of us have is that that the BBC seem to be giving credence to his claims about oxygen not working, and percentages of injuries and the like...perhaps all airlines might consider putting a copy of David Learmount's recent blog into their seatback pockets...for once he sums things up nicely..he doesn't quite say flying has it's hazards and **** can happen, but he at least says "get used to the reality".
Learmount
Why haven't we discussed the reason for the depressurisation? - Because we don't know.
BTW not all of those onside with Ryanair here are "RYR Fleet Pilots". I'm certainly not one and I'm certainly not one to rush to defend MOL, but I can recognise poor/biased/sensationalist reporting when I hear it...
Learmount
Why haven't we discussed the reason for the depressurisation? - Because we don't know.
BTW not all of those onside with Ryanair here are "RYR Fleet Pilots". I'm certainly not one and I'm certainly not one to rush to defend MOL, but I can recognise poor/biased/sensationalist reporting when I hear it...
Last edited by wiggy; 27th Aug 2008 at 13:07. Reason: sspelling, added link
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: essex
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think it's interesting we've now seen it on a fleet as standard and one would hope constant as the RYR fleet upon which, The Real Slim Shady has quite rightly been laudibly telling us recently, they have an excellent automatic 24/7 self diagnostics 'phone home' telemetry(?) system which communicates constantly with a central station called 'Maintrol'(?) reporting the health of various aircraft systems irrespective of any crew reports.
It never ceases to amaze me how a group of "professional pilots" can talk such drivel about subjects that they are either ill informed or plain not informed! can't you wait for official reports before scaremongering about what happened.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: De Dam
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re the Telegraph graphic
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/telegraph...-l_796317a.jpg
No one has yet congratulated the pilots on managing to miss crashing into both Mt Everest and Mt Blanc on the way down. Well done chaps.
As to why the plane depressurised, you can see from the second picture that they had the gear down at 37,000ft - so the air probably came out of the holes in the floor.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/telegraph...-l_796317a.jpg
No one has yet congratulated the pilots on managing to miss crashing into both Mt Everest and Mt Blanc on the way down. Well done chaps.
As to why the plane depressurised, you can see from the second picture that they had the gear down at 37,000ft - so the air probably came out of the holes in the floor.
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: In my head
Posts: 694
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What does it matter whether Hadow thought his oxygen wasn't working or whether it was actually working as designed? The point is he described confusion over how you are supposed to breathe the damn stuff when the only physical signs he observed of whether something was happening were not reassuring ones! On that score he was not wrong - he was there and confused - he said so! I believe him!
Anyway, since everyone is very much alive and able to explain their actions, Hadow included, I very much now want to know what the airline has to say about the cause please. And if the media drag it out of them sooner than they would otherwise wish to, then I don't mind, because I am looking for good old-fashioned reassurance.
I still have no idea what the hell happened when the Ryanair went off the runway at Limoges. I bet there are people who are hoping I never do.
Has the local French rag got any ground-breaking news on that one? Sometimes it takes more than sitting back and relaxing to get the most out of an airline.
Anyway, since everyone is very much alive and able to explain their actions, Hadow included, I very much now want to know what the airline has to say about the cause please. And if the media drag it out of them sooner than they would otherwise wish to, then I don't mind, because I am looking for good old-fashioned reassurance.
I still have no idea what the hell happened when the Ryanair went off the runway at Limoges. I bet there are people who are hoping I never do.
Has the local French rag got any ground-breaking news on that one? Sometimes it takes more than sitting back and relaxing to get the most out of an airline.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Dre's mum's house
Posts: 1,432
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Slip and Turn
The aircraft would not have been operated with any deferred faults as the MEL does not permit it. As tob2 points out the aircraft only phones home on landing; it doesn't communicate constantly with Operations.
The aircraft would not have been operated with any deferred faults as the MEL does not permit it. As tob2 points out the aircraft only phones home on landing; it doesn't communicate constantly with Operations.
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: In my head
Posts: 694
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks Real Slim, I was attempting to regurgitate some of the reassurance I had gleaned form your posts, and obviously I spat out far more than I ingested 
Nice system to have though, as I am sure you were saying. I remain reassured by it - hope that is not misplaced 
So with no allowed deferred items which could possibly affect the life support system, and if the aircraft had phoned home and quoted happy when it was last on the ground, can we assume that there was a depressurisation event that could not be predicted by the manufacturer or the maintainer, and which has baffled all those who are now looking at it?
Nice system to have though, as I am sure you were saying. I remain reassured by it - hope that is not misplaced So with no allowed deferred items which could possibly affect the life support system, and if the aircraft had phoned home and quoted happy when it was last on the ground, can we assume that there was a depressurisation event that could not be predicted by the manufacturer or the maintainer, and which has baffled all those who are now looking at it?
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: France
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@slipandturn: Hear, hear.
I have flown on several occasions since the March 'landing' in Limoges. I am growing increasingly nervous with each flight and landing, and every time I wonder what happened in Limoges in March. Every time I wonder if the cabin crew I'm flying with are less stressed than the crew on that day. And, more importantly, if they are better briefed than the crew on that day - because of how that 'landing' was handled.
Ryanair - and most other airlines, I presume - will kick queries to touch with the line that there is an 'ongoing investigation'. That's fine, but who is overseeing these investigations; who is maintaining objective reporting standards; are investigators obliged to make recommendations on foot of findings; who determines that these investigations take place in a timely manner; and who publishes and disseminates these reports for public consumption?
I have flown on several occasions since the March 'landing' in Limoges. I am growing increasingly nervous with each flight and landing, and every time I wonder what happened in Limoges in March. Every time I wonder if the cabin crew I'm flying with are less stressed than the crew on that day. And, more importantly, if they are better briefed than the crew on that day - because of how that 'landing' was handled.
Ryanair - and most other airlines, I presume - will kick queries to touch with the line that there is an 'ongoing investigation'. That's fine, but who is overseeing these investigations; who is maintaining objective reporting standards; are investigators obliged to make recommendations on foot of findings; who determines that these investigations take place in a timely manner; and who publishes and disseminates these reports for public consumption?