SQ A380 emergency landing in Baku due to low cabin pressure
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Singapore
Posts: 89
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It would seem that the engineer at LHR should have sorted the faulty door seal there properly rather than signing the aircraft off for the next sector. Rings tales of SQ cutting corners to keep the planes flying, no doubt the crew will get gong's for their actions on return to Singapore.
And why on earth did they choose Baku it was bound to be a nightmare for the passengers....
And why on earth did they choose Baku it was bound to be a nightmare for the passengers....
Nemo Me Impune Lacessit
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Derbyshire, England.
Posts: 4,091
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It would seem that the engineer at LHR should have sorted the faulty door seal there properly rather than signing the aircraft off for the next sector. Rings tales of SQ cutting corners to keep the planes flying, no doubt the crew will get gong's for their actions on return to Singapore.
Almost certainly the engineer that signed the aircraft off would not have been SIA, unless they now base engineers in London?
"Rings tales of SQ cutting corners to keep the planes flying"
Got any evidence of that happening ITman? Maybe you just don't like SIA?
You are obviously neither an engineer or a pilot...
Door seal can be noisy, checked, unable to find anything wrong, few flights later may act up again. Many possible reasons. In this case it was obviously more going by the photo but no engo in his right mind would sign off an aircraft that he thought was not fit to operate within the scope of allowable limits. Personally through more than a few airlines I've seen and heard 'noisy doors' on all types yes inc 380. In all but one case it settled within a few minutes and was down to sand/pebble/water in the door. At all carriers was SOP to check prior to closing. Impossible to see sand/tiny pebbles. In one other case it was a slight dent in the metal door plate which was microscopic and easily given a temp fix by engineer until it could get to the hangar.
as for Baku, PIC obviously felt it was good enough, his arse was on the line too....
Door seal can be noisy, checked, unable to find anything wrong, few flights later may act up again. Many possible reasons. In this case it was obviously more going by the photo but no engo in his right mind would sign off an aircraft that he thought was not fit to operate within the scope of allowable limits. Personally through more than a few airlines I've seen and heard 'noisy doors' on all types yes inc 380. In all but one case it settled within a few minutes and was down to sand/pebble/water in the door. At all carriers was SOP to check prior to closing. Impossible to see sand/tiny pebbles. In one other case it was a slight dent in the metal door plate which was microscopic and easily given a temp fix by engineer until it could get to the hangar.
as for Baku, PIC obviously felt it was good enough, his arse was on the line too....
As for all the pax complaints about Baku, this old saying applies - "its better to be on the ground wishing you were in the air, than in the air wishing you were on the ground"
And why on earth did they choose Baku it was bound to be a nightmare for the passengers....
Colder cabin; on the contrary it may have been hotter due to the (presumed) increase in airflow from the packs attempting to maintain pressure, which may cause the cold air units to struggle.
In interesting picture although not sure to understand exactly what has failed (you seem that the door structure has failed but seems quite extreme if only induced by pressure differential...) ?
Haven't been there recently but wasn't Terminal 3 supposed to be opened this year ? It seems it would have provided fairly adequate facilities ?
As for alternates, except maybe for Teheran, I don't see what other choices they might had...
As for alternates, except maybe for Teheran, I don't see what other choices they might had...
Whereas wasting time telling the SLF COULD kill them.....
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: flying by night
Posts: 500
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Door seal problems are notoriously hard to reproduce on the ground because the a/c needs to be pressurised...but in this case I'm confident someone will soon be able to figure out what caused this, not that I can tell anything from the picture, but the gremlins seem to have left clues
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Dublin
Posts: 987
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Safety first, comfort second. The alternate airport worked for them.
I'm with you glofish, given only 119 flying, reports of incidents seem fairly common for such a small numbers in service. Did the 747 have as many incidents when it was introduced? Perhaps it did but we never heard about it. The A380 and 787 have been born in an era when if you fart in the pointy end we hear about it on the ground even before those around you notice the smell.
I'm with you glofish, given only 119 flying, reports of incidents seem fairly common for such a small numbers in service. Did the 747 have as many incidents when it was introduced? Perhaps it did but we never heard about it. The A380 and 787 have been born in an era when if you fart in the pointy end we hear about it on the ground even before those around you notice the smell.
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: what U.S. calls ´old Europe´
Posts: 941
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What is the A380 procedure if you receive an EICAS Message "Pax door unlocked" at cruising altitude? Manually switch of pressurization and land ASAP? Or does the bus depressurize automatically in that case, just to prevent an explosive event (which potentially is much worse) ?
Sober Lark
Yes it did - the first 747s experienced many problems with the Pratt & Whitney JT9D engines. If that had happened today I hate to think what Pruners would have made of the number of engine shut downs. Glofish would have had a field day!!
Yes it did - the first 747s experienced many problems with the Pratt & Whitney JT9D engines. If that had happened today I hate to think what Pruners would have made of the number of engine shut downs. Glofish would have had a field day!!
Last edited by Bergerie1; 7th Jan 2014 at 07:49.
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Moscow
Age: 54
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"In the event of an inflight emergency beyond our control, do you agree to a bit of discomfort whilst the problem is sorted out, or would you rather die ?"
Long standing applause ! Must have upon entry to a/c !
if the wx was out at Baku, what to do?
looks a bit sparse on the map---would an A380 at FL10-12 be able to go back to Istanbul from their decent/diversion point?
looks a bit sparse on the map---would an A380 at FL10-12 be able to go back to Istanbul from their decent/diversion point?