BA288 Emergency at Phoenix

[Someone_Else]

bunkrest... Please tell me you are joking......

I'm sorry, I may have mis-understood your post.

Isn't it obvious. As somone who has received numerous fire training packages at different work premises, alerting those around you that there is a fire is the number one priority and shouting is a quick method of doing so!

Why should this be any different on a plane? It's the cabin crews primary responsibilty to hear this and take appropriate action, including reducing any "panic" that might ensue.

Please tell us that you are joking???

[sudden twang]

Potential

Some fairly direct comments here it's nice to see that you remain pragmatic and calm.

Shouting " fire" IMHO would probably cause more probs than it would solve .

The real issue is that , as has been pionted out, action by passengers could easily create more danger . What if the fumes had been from a main gear wheel bearing on the left hand side ? the fumes could well go into the pack inlets causing smoke /fumes in the cabin . Opening a door on the left hand side could allow flames fumes directly into the cabin .

Bottom line ,if the cabin crew are not initiating an evac with their trained procs. neither should the passengers .

It is v important the captain keeps all parties in the loop but NOT when he/she is in the middle of dealing with the situation .

[Flap62]

Someone else

1. Because there was no indication of fire at this stage. Smoke - yes, sparks - possibly, but that is very different to fire.

2. Because your fire training may have equiped you with basic knowledge to equip you to cope with reaction to fire in the average workplace. You can generally exit these workplaces by doors or fire escapes. Aircraft are not like these. That is why they have highly trained crew to assist people through potentially hazardous situations and yes, an emergency evac is a hazardous situation.

3. Because shouting fire will increase the stress levels hugely and people do not perform well when over aroused. They need calm direction, not some partly trained half wit with hero complex trying to use his limited knowledge who only succeeds in making things worse.

[bunkrest]

Below is a description of the event posted on youtube alongside some footage of the evacuation.

I've highlighted a section of interest to those that seem to think shouting "fire" though a cabin load of jittery pax is an effective option....

The video being being utilized was captured by me on the tarmac. The odor of the smoke quickly took your breathe away and burned the lungs. The odor quickly become more potent and the instant feeling of being a trapped animal rushed over me. The captain came over the PA and announced we would be heading back to the gate due to this intense odor. Moments later, directly across from where I was standing, passengers began to scream and yell, "FIRE!" At this point, what appeared to be chaos broke out in the cabin and a passenger rushed the emergency exit door and opened it while a flight attendant yelled not to. The passenger exited and at that instant the captain announced that we were to go to manual exit and the flight attendants quickly began opening the exit doors to get the passengers out as quickly as possible. The BA staff did a great job to get everyone out of the plane and onto the tarmac.

[Potential]

As I said before, I don't actually know who shouted fire initially, I think I heard more than one voice shout it. I did not personally see any fire, but there definitely was sparks and smoke, so it is not out of the question that there was also flames. Either way, it was obviously an electrical fault and it is likely that fire would have followed if the situation was not dealt with promptly. I dug out my old SEP manual and I quote "in the case of electrical fire there is likely to be a smell of burning followed by smoke prior to the appearance of any flames."

I assume that on hearing this passengers shout, the cabin crew isolated the electrical supply to the seats and I know that they also discharged a BCF in the affected area. Their reaction may not have been so swift if they had not immediately been informed by the passengers call, though the use of the word 'fire', may possibly have been more correctly replaced by 'smoke' or 'sparks.'

My colleague who went down the back did so to stop people running from the back into the area where the sparks/smoke/possible fire was. This had been happening for some time since the smell had started to get bad. It was mainly people with young children who were running around. I assume that they were moving in the hope that they could find somewhere in the aircraft that was not affected by the smell or that they were expecting everyone to exit through L1 and they understandably wanted to be one of the first. My friend simply stopped any more people coming forward into the affected area, which also kept the area clear for the crew to deal with it. He wasn't simply running about like a mad man shouting "fire, fire, fire", but he was giving people sensible instructions which were helpful to the situation.

I do understand people's comments about the words "fire" possibly causing panic, but at the same time the main focus is to extinguish the fire as soon as possible. I would say that a delayed response leading to an uncontrollable fire would cause significantly more panic.

It is all very easy for the armchair experts to criticise our actions and on reflection maybe some things could have been done differently. However, the bottom line regarding this incident is that everyone got out safely which is the main goal in an emergency. If people want to have a sensible grown up discussion about SEPs then I'm willing to contribute, but I'm not interested in getting into a slagging match. I will definitely be interested to see the recommendations that come out of the investigation into this incident.

[RatherBeFlying]

Once People are having Breathing Difficulties

It's past time to shut down and evacuate.

Quite simply, if I'm choking, I'm going.

I expect the Phoenix litigation lawyers will be making serious money on the delay. Likely there will be claims for impairment of respiratory function. Any jury will be unimpressed by the need to adhere to procedures if they feel these procedures impede timely decision making.

The pax reports lead me to suspect that the degree of distress in the cabin was not adequately made known to the cockpit.

I have been in buildings on fire on four occasions -- fortunately all minor. A little whiff of smoke fully justifies immediate evacuation as it can become a much bigger problem in next to no time at all.

We are seeing a conflict of perspectives. The crews are able boded and located next to an exit and are biased against a quick decision to evacuate by balancing of risk, procedures, hierarchy and job security. Most SLFs are obstructed by their fellows (many not the brightest and hanging on to bulky items) and often have children or infirm loved ones to worry about as well as their own skin.

[M.Mouse]

I do not wish to participate in the debate amongst all you armchair experts explaining how a rapidly evolving and dynamic situation should have been handled, especially as many, not all, have absolutely no perception of how difficult it is for the flight crew to know just exactly how bad things are in the cabin, how much time it takes to shut down any engines that may have been started, how much time it takes to communicate with ATC and ground crew and possibly ground staff to inform them of the problem and the initial desire to return to stand before being informed of the escalating seriousness of the problem. Therefore, I shall wait and see what the report reveals despite hearing first hand from one of the pilots what happened from his perspective.

What I do wish to comment upon, though, is the appalling (in my opinion) way in which IFE/and seat power is wired on the B744s of my experience. Anybody with any experience of wiring, electrical loads and good wiring practice would be very, very surprised at what is allowed. I was unaware of the different rules, which someone mentioned earlier, which apply to non-essential wiring aboard aeroplanes. I accept that power can be isolated and fire suppressed but the acrid fumes from electrical fires have to be experienced to truly understand how noxious and unpleasant they are.

Edited for an errant apostrophe!

[very old flyer]

Better safe than sorry!

Well, a better outcome than Saudia Flight 163 on August 19, 1980 when after landing the L-1011-200 safely with a fire on board, NOBODY gave the order to evacuate, and ALL 287 pax and 14 crew died.
Check Wikipedia.

[Joetom]

MM,

Sounds like your post has much information, tks.

The IFE systems add much weight, wires can be thin and well pulled and heat can cause problems, good job they were on the ground.

However the evac was started, appears it went ok.

[IanWorthington]

Stupid, heavy cabin bags again
Here are the stupid, heavy cabin bags again. How many times must we remind the companies that they should NOT allow the pax to bring those stupid, heavy cabin bags onboard. The gate agents MUST stop them at the jet way, and NOT allow them onboard. Who would want to be mindlessly brained from behind by a heavy carry on dropped by an idiot? A child could be seriously injured by those stupid bags. Maybe the companies should just remove the big overhead compartments and forbid all the carry on bags.

Whilst I certainly do not condone passengers taking on board bags they cannot lift, it must be recognised as the own-goal it is. If airlines were liable for damage contents, and reintroduced higher limits it would not be necessary for passengers to transport heavy and fragile items in the cabin.

For light releif on this subject, check out YouTube - United Breaks Guitars

i

[CargoOne]

As it could be expected, there are many posts on this forum commending cabin crew performance. However, what is a bit unusual, we have as much as several first hand withnesses here, and when I'm reading them, I'm failing to see anything which suggests good or exceptonal performance of CC.

Don't you think we have a case where evacuation was successfull despite CC performance?

[ballyboley]

I see the aircraft is still sitting on an airbridge way at the other end of the airport, from what I could see it looks OK apart from the APU inspection doors were open. Does anyone know how long it has to stay there for or what will happen to it?

[SLF3b]

I was on a BA 777 that had an emergency evacuation.

One of things that struck me afterwards was how peoples recollection of an incident can differ substantially even when they are in close proximity. As an example, how serious you thought the incident was depended on whether you were facing forward or back and which side of the aircraft you were on. Discussing it afterwards, in the row I was in the guy by the left hand window thought we were going to die, the guy next to me thought we were in big trouble and I (right hand window) thought I was going to be late for a meeting. All rational opinions based on what we experienced.

My colleague and I went out the same door, one behind the other. He recalls a stewardess shouting 'go, go, go' or something similar at the door. I have no recollection of seeing or hearing her.

Each of the posters above is relating what they recall - but recollection of events at times of high stress is not perfect and different people will have had very different experiences.

Oh - and if I saw smoke and sparks under my seat I think it highly likely that I would shout 'fire'. I need to get someone's attention, and fast.

[sb_sfo]

sudden twang- a couple things

PA speakers are mounted below the overhead storage ( mostly ) so people standing in the cabin are less likely to hear PAs especially if there is noise in the cabin

1) the 74's I'm familiar with have the PA speakers mounted in the ceiling. Yours may be different, but I doubt it.

the fumes could well go into the pack inlets causing smoke /fumes in the cabin

2) The pack inlet air comes from engine bleed air- the NACA ducts that you see on the lower fuse are ram air inlets- that air cools the heat exchangers, and doesn't enter the cabin. Unlikely that smoke/fumes from a wheel bearing fire are going to enter the cabin that way.

Air cycle machine - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[Dream Buster]

Ill health - possible from smoke / fumes.

sb_sfo,

Addendum to Annex 5 TOX/2006/21
COMMITTEE ON TOXICITY OF CHEMICALS IN FOOD CONSUMER PRODUCTS AND THE ENVIRONMENT (COT)
DISCUSSION PAPER ON THE CABIN AIR ENVIRONMENT, ILL-HEALTH IN AIRCRAFT CREWS AND THE POSSIBLE RELATIONSHIP TO SMOKE/FUME EVENTS IN AIRCRAFT
[This discussion document has been prepared by the COT secretariat to assist the COT in its discussions. It does not represent a formal view of the COT]
1. Members will wish to see recent data submitted in respect of generic information for aircraft air conditioning systems including diagrams specific for the B757 appended to this covering note.
Secretariat June 2006

Good link to air cycle machines & Wikepedia. Here is a paper from 2006 which makes reference to possible ill health from breathing oil smoke / fumes.

How can it be that tobacco smoke is now well accepted as being lethal and yet ill health from breathing oil smoke in a confined space is still, four years later - only possible?

It would appear that the smoke in this incident was electrical though - does anybody know for sure yet?

Thanks.

DB

[Andyismyname]

Very Old Flyer, check your facts about the Saudia L-1011 accident. My understanding is that the aircraft was still pressurised after landing, and as the engines were still running, with the pressurisation system landing elevation set for Jeddah, not Riyahd, no-one could have opened the doors until the pressure slowly bled off, in about 10 minutes. All perished.

So, in circumstances other than Saudia's, regardless of how much we cabin crew are paid, a properly trained CAA or FAA certified minimum number of crew can evacuate an aircraft.

[williamd]

apaddyinuk

Williamd, Interesting first hand account. As for the TSA/Security people prior to when you boarded. BA is one of the only remaining european airlines serving PHX (Not sure but I think LH have or are pulling out) and always attracts the huge number of TSA staff as it is sort of a training flight for them. So in answer to your suspicions...no, they was probably nothing going on, they were just looking for something to do. If you think PHX was bad you should see MIA on occasion.

You were wrong to get your luggage, to turn around and swear at a passenger for getting their book was simple hypocriscy. When you went back on stand you could have been on the aircraft for ages (regardless of a situation or not) so there was really no need to join the mob who got up and clamoured for their luggage but at the same time, I suppose its an easy mistake to make.

Can I make it clear (thats why this is in bold), I did not "clamour" for my luggage. When we were told we were returning to stand I told my family to gather up our stuff, which was all in front of us under the seats, as we would be departing the plane via the jetway and as we would almost certainly be spending the night in Phoenix I didn't see the point in leaving passports, cash etc on the plane, especially as there was no panic at this point (a level of anxiety yes). Shortly after that someone shouted fire and then the evac was called. As we already had bags in hand I didn't see the point in spending time putting them back!!

The person who was looking for a book was standing in the ailse, leaning back in to a seat (not the ailse seat), blocking the way of people who were trying to get off a plane when an emergency evacuation had been called. I am pretty sure you wouldn't have been too chuffed about their farting about either.

Of course, you weren't there.

Hate to criticise a fellow irishman (well 50% on my part) but thought I needed to make this clear.

[DingerX]

Non-essential communications are rarely good in incidents like this. The people who know things and can do things are to busy finding those things out and acting on them to keep everyone in the loop. So if you get the information that you need to survive, the rest is gravy.

While untrained passengers can behave unexpectedly, their behavior mostly falls into a predictable range. If the cabin crew is faced with a situation where passengers start self-evacuating, they either have a nutcase on board, or they have demonstrably lost control of the cabin.

[williamd]

DingerX

I wouldn't go as far to say they lost control of the cabin (it was getting close though as more and more people were up and about as the fumes got worse) but if a passenger did indeed open a door then perhaps they had lost control at that area.

Either way, my own opinion is that it took too long for them to decide to return to the stand. If they had immediately decided to return when the fumes were first detected then I don't think things would have reached the stage they did. Of course, if passengers were disembarking through the jetway then smoke appeared in the cabin it could have got quite nasty.

However you look at it, it was a pretty scary incident and one which I hope to never be involved in again.

[ACL1011]

How can it be that tobacco smoke is now well accepted as being lethal and yet ill health from breathing oil smoke in a confined space is still, four years later - only possible?

One of my degrees is in toxicology. Although I am not a toxicologist, I do recall from first-hand experience in counselling patients on possible pregnancy outcomes to exposure to work fumes etc. how difficult it is to link these types of exposures to outcomes. Unlike medications, where dose is known, it is difficult to estimate exposure to airbourne toxins. A single exposure, such as the one described in this thread, would be almost impossible to link to a long-term outcome.* Even in cases of chronic exposure, because the outcome is relatively rare and could take years to develop, unless you have a large number of people exposed, it would be difficult to make a definitive link.

Because of the shear proportion of the population that smoke (i.e., large number of people exposed), epidemiologists were able to definitively* link cigarette smoking with outcomes such as lung cancer.

* As definitively as we can link anything--I work with stats so for me to use word tells you there is VERY strong evidence for the link. I am always leary of making a definitive statement!