Emirates A380 continues to LHR after Cargo Fire?

[glad rag]

At the start of the thread is a rumour about continued flight with an active lower cargo fire warning. Could anyone actually provide some substance to the rumour?

Exactly.

Go look up CARGO FIRE VERIFICATION SYSTEM (CFVS) losers!

gr.

[Swannecker]

The photo is an A321 with a Centre Auxilary tank fitted in the aft hold if that helps.......

[segajet]

The cargo temperature should give you a good idea if the smoke warning is genuine, but it would be a brave/dumb pilot who disregarded the warning. Even a past history of snags in the tech log can't be trusted. I well remember the Dan 748 with a history of spurious door warnings, leading to the rear door warning being ignored,after a visual check by the new loadmaster. The volume of cargo prevented the pilots from carrying out their own check, and possibly spotting the webbing that was jamming the locking mechanism. It just wasn't their day when the door detached and deformed around the tailplane.

[Ocampo]

...with no lighting: an orange glow
...with lighting: smoke

If cost permitted, thermal imaging in some form would be a more useful tool.

I think the additional information provided by the camera would be only that of the side of the front container that is facing the camera. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I seem to recall that every airplane that can fly containers in its hold, always flies with all the containers it can carry. A camera wouldn't help that much, me thinks.

As some had already said, maybe a thermometer would be of greater help

[wingview]

Maybe a dumb question, but with today's containers how can you put out a fire in a container? Possibly the fire won't spread that quick in such container, but I would like to go back to the nearest airport available asap! If it was a false warning, bad luck. If it was good it could save my life!

[Re-Heat]

In 1929, the Stock Market crashed through unrestrained greed and the effect lasted for more than a decade. The US govt (and others) put big fat laws into place. In less than 80 years, those laws had been dismantled and another great greed had overtaken the whole world, that we will be paying for across more than a decade.

Now think about the laws helping to keep the wonderful flight safety record? No one can guess how long it will take to reach the low point because the prangs will happen at various places around the globe, under different jurisdictions. So we will have to have more prangs/near prangs before there is sufficient reaction from the public.

My hunch is that it won't start to look really ugly for another 12/15 years, due to the time it will take for the generations of FC and managers to work through the system. Many carriers are only as safe as they are because so many of their staff (in all positions) are experienced enough to have seen the lessons learnt at first hand. Once they are gone - then we are all at risk once again.

Why did it take 79 years for the Stock Markets to crash again? The men and women who had been in the middle of it were gone and their children were retired (or dead) so their grandchildren were in charge and they did not listen to their grandparents ...

Poor analogy in my opinion. There were people in 1931 who were talking up the market once again, having forgotten the lessons of 1929, when they failed to understand they were in a bear market rally. The laws involved were in no way the cause of the recent crisis, and in finance, even the experienced forget the last crisis if a fast buck can be made.

More important is the eduction of professionals on past safety issues. I have never yet had a serious situation in the air and hope never to have one, largely as I am highly conservative by nature and was trained as such.

I can't say some of the others who fly around me are as conservative - some very experienced, some not. I don't think experience of accidents is relevant - it is the eduction on the first flying lesson or the first engineering lesson that breeds the safest and most competent operators.

[Geezers of Nazareth]

I think the additional information provided by the camera would be only that of the side of the front container that is facing the camera. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I seem to recall that every airplane that can fly containers in its hold, always flies with all the containers it can carry. A camera wouldn't help that much, me thinks.

No.

I've seen plenty of aircraft with empty spaces in the cargo/baggage hold. In fact, I've seen aircraft where an entire hold is empty. Not necessarily due to lack of cargo, either. Might be because of a faulty loading-system, so nothing can be loaded.