British Airways 777 diverts to Goose Bay - fumes in flight deck - FO incapacitated
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: London
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
G-ZZZC veered of the centre line landing back at LHR. Caused a VS jet to go-round.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: fl
Posts: 2,525
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I had fumes in the cabin and cockpit leaving MIA for Honduras, declared an emergency and returned. It was about a year after the Swissair crash off Halifax. It smelled like electrical smoke. I shut off all non essential busses and landed our major airliner using immediate action before checklist. Two weeks later our airline changed our procedure to what I did. Prior.to this it was a check list item. Swissair crashed because they delayed landing to dump fuel and didn't eliminate the source of the fire. The galley oven was the source of our problem even though we could smell the fumes on landing. I knew our procedures were the same as Swissair so made my own to protect our crew and passengers.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 5,898
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Granted nitpicker, I can flick the mic off when I want to inhale and reselect it active when I wish to speak. Many aircraft, same type, same company, different airframe, have latching mic switches and some which should have them don't
Pity the poor skipper if the 777 is fitted with those awful "Eros" O2 masks.
Doubtless a lot of heavy breathing and if using one, (s)he would deafen and distract themselves with the racket every time a breath is taken.
Doubtless a lot of heavy breathing and if using one, (s)he would deafen and distract themselves with the racket every time a breath is taken.
Most flight crews can't manage comm in a sim situation with masks, dread to find myself in a situation where it's critical to wear your mask , get the right switch for O2 , get the smoke diffuser going and bark instructions to RHS....
Having had a smoke incident on the 777 and been on O2 from shortly after rotation until shutdown on the ground, I have to agree that the masks could do with a bit of a re-design. Running the smoke and/or smoke removal checklist involves a fair amount of work on the overhead panel and coordinating that with breathing, etc. can be a bit of a game, especially if the ECL was obscured and you ended up with the QRH in one hand.
The major consideration was that I was glad to have a mask that fitted and was supplying 100% oxygen and for that purpose it worked excellently...
The major consideration was that I was glad to have a mask that fitted and was supplying 100% oxygen and for that purpose it worked excellently...
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: FUBAR
Posts: 3,348
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Going back to post #21, why did it veer off the centre-line after landing having completed a long flight with (assumedly) no crew incapacitation issues ? 
or this was a totally unrelated whoopsy that coincidentally involved the same airframe ?
or this was a totally unrelated whoopsy that coincidentally involved the same airframe ?
Per Ardua ad Astraeus
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 18,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: U.K.
Age: 68
Posts: 380
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Singapore
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bubbers
Your statement on SR111 is wrong and disrespectful. These rumours went on for some years but professional pilots should read the investigation before they make judgements.
From the investigation:
"Based on these factors, it is evident that even if the pilots had attempted a minimum-time emergency diversion starting at 0114:18, it would have been impossible for the pilots to continue maintaining control of the aircraft for the amount of time necessary to reach the airport and complete a safe landing."
Your statement on SR111 is wrong and disrespectful. These rumours went on for some years but professional pilots should read the investigation before they make judgements.
From the investigation:
"Based on these factors, it is evident that even if the pilots had attempted a minimum-time emergency diversion starting at 0114:18, it would have been impossible for the pilots to continue maintaining control of the aircraft for the amount of time necessary to reach the airport and complete a safe landing."
Sr111
You are correct - they didn't have time whatever anyone else says - had two mates who were on the aeropers team.
What you would need to ask is who was responsible for the design of the system and the materials.
What you would need to ask is who was responsible for the design of the system and the materials.
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Anywhere
Age: 34
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have one question... If pilot during the flight became's incapacitated, what happens to his career? Does he still can be a pilot? Can he still work as a commercial pilot after such an accident?
Can he still work as a commercial pilot after such an accident?
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 3,093
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@F Dolarhyde/blind pew - correct.
The other crucial aspect was that the seat of the SR111 fire was in the IFE wiring bundle. It ran through the ceiling behind a panel and the thermal insulation blankets (which in turn caught light) - there was no practical way to get even hand-held fire suppression apparatus to the source of the fire.
The other crucial aspect was that the seat of the SR111 fire was in the IFE wiring bundle. It ran through the ceiling behind a panel and the thermal insulation blankets (which in turn caught light) - there was no practical way to get even hand-held fire suppression apparatus to the source of the fire.
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: U.K.
Age: 68
Posts: 380
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Medical Protocol
Kristupito,
Anybody exposed to toxic fumes, along with their medical providers should read this 2009 US funded advice - which refers to long term effects:
http://www.aerotoxic.org/download/do...ocol031909.pdf
But many 'interested parties' insist there is 'no evidence' of ill health from toxic fumes in a confined space.
Sorry if i've already published this, but few seem to know about it.
Why would anybody make it all up?
Anybody exposed to toxic fumes, along with their medical providers should read this 2009 US funded advice - which refers to long term effects:
http://www.aerotoxic.org/download/do...ocol031909.pdf
But many 'interested parties' insist there is 'no evidence' of ill health from toxic fumes in a confined space.
Sorry if i've already published this, but few seem to know about it.
Why would anybody make it all up?
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: nowhere
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bubbers
Your statement on SR111 is wrong and disrespectful. These rumours went on for some years but professional pilots should read the investigation before they make judgements.
From the investigation:
"Based on these factors, it is evident that even if the pilots had attempted a minimum-time emergency diversion starting at 0114:18, it would have been impossible for the pilots to continue maintaining control of the aircraft for the amount of time necessary to reach the airport and complete a safe landing."
Your statement on SR111 is wrong and disrespectful. These rumours went on for some years but professional pilots should read the investigation before they make judgements.
From the investigation:
"Based on these factors, it is evident that even if the pilots had attempted a minimum-time emergency diversion starting at 0114:18, it would have been impossible for the pilots to continue maintaining control of the aircraft for the amount of time necessary to reach the airport and complete a safe landing."
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: flying by night
Posts: 500
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
the question of whether it is a good idea when on fire, to delay landing in order to dump fuel. Something to consider.
SR111 could, as has been pointed out, not have been saved even with an immediate landing, but clearly the SR A/C smoke checklist was taking too much time to complete, and many checklists have been adapted to reflect this. Yet, the crew of US1549 did not have the luxury to ponder whether to complete various checklists while gliding and preparing to ditch, their aircraft simply didn't wait for checklist completion.
UA232 didn't have any checklists for complete loss of hydraulics and flight controls...
QF32...a torrent of ECAM actions, some of which contradict each other ( "aircraft CoG out of limits", asking to transfer fuel, and then "THS transfer not available").
The final report for QF32 isn't out yet I think (?), but I believe one of the lessons to take away - once again - is that while non-normal checklists and ECAM actions are extremely important tools, and can no doubt be further streamlined and improved, no standardized course of action can completely and safely resolve EVERY possible emergency situation.
Last edited by deptrai; 14th Feb 2013 at 05:55.
Join Date: Dec 1998
Location: UK
Posts: 293
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Boeing QRH for smoke was amended after swissair crash to include:
Initiate a diversion to the nearest suitable airport
while continuing the checklist.
and
Consider an immediate landing if the smoke, fire or
fumes situation becomes uncontrollable.
and
If a smoke, fire or fumes situation becomes uncontrollable, the flight crew should consider an immediate landing. Immediate landing implies immediate diversion to a runway. However, in a severe situation, the flight crew should consider an overweight landing, a tailwind landing, an off-airport landing, or a ditching.
Initiate a diversion to the nearest suitable airport
while continuing the checklist.
and
Consider an immediate landing if the smoke, fire or
fumes situation becomes uncontrollable.
and
If a smoke, fire or fumes situation becomes uncontrollable, the flight crew should consider an immediate landing. Immediate landing implies immediate diversion to a runway. However, in a severe situation, the flight crew should consider an overweight landing, a tailwind landing, an off-airport landing, or a ditching.