Another reason not to fly Asiana
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: USA
Posts: 415
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, as long as there are no Samsung phones/tablets in the cargo hold they should be fine. Another possibility is some exotic fruit,vegetable or food product setting off the sensor.
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: CARIBE
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I guess he has four engines and ETOPS is a relative thing, but a few minutes into it he probably thought he wasn't on fire because he was still alive and made his way back to a place he knew he had service. Staring over three hours at a fire indication is an acquired taste but they are hard to get rid off if the sensors are activated. Know nothing about Airbuses, but I assume part of his checklist is turning the fans off. I would have done the same thing. Would hate to have to explain why I went ETOPS with a fire indication, the next day at the chief pilot's office.
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: York
Posts: 737
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
efatnas
ETOPS twinjets have been required since 1985 to carry sufficient fire suppressant to protect the airplane continuously throughout a maximum-duration diversion. In contrast, although all jetliners have cargo fire suppression systems, airplanes with more than two engines have not previously had to meet this requirement that further protects passengers, crews, and airplanes on extended air routes.
Not familiar with A380.
ETOPS twinjets have been required since 1985 to carry sufficient fire suppressant to protect the airplane continuously throughout a maximum-duration diversion. In contrast, although all jetliners have cargo fire suppression systems, airplanes with more than two engines have not previously had to meet this requirement that further protects passengers, crews, and airplanes on extended air routes.
Not familiar with A380.
Join Date: May 2004
Location: By the Sea
Posts: 97
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Reading this thread, all that is going through my head is UPS Flight 6. If it's me, I'm going to the nearest suitable and sorting it all out on the ground.
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: CARIBE
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
4468
Aha…. didn't know that. They got to have something down there. What's the point of having a smoke detector if you can't do anything about the smoke. I'm not sure just because you have more then two engines you are excluded from long range requirements if you go ETOPS, meaning certain distances from a pad.
Aha…. didn't know that. They got to have something down there. What's the point of having a smoke detector if you can't do anything about the smoke. I'm not sure just because you have more then two engines you are excluded from long range requirements if you go ETOPS, meaning certain distances from a pad.
The ETOPS requirements for fire suppression now apply to all passenger jets, regardless of the number of engines. In fact, nearly all the ETOPS requirements except engine reliability apply to passenger quads. It's been that way since around 2010 IIRC.
Freighters with more than two engines are exempt from all the ETOPS requirements (I know, don't shoot the messenger here...)
Freighters with more than two engines are exempt from all the ETOPS requirements (I know, don't shoot the messenger here...)
freighter requirements
going slightly off topic here, the 767 BCF freighters have no fire extinguishers in the lower cargo holds. They have the same method to fight fires as applied to the main deck fire. Depressurise, descend to 25000' and hope like hell it works out.
For carriage of certain lithium batteries, the recommended procedure is "land immediately", which, if you're over water means ditch the damn thing.
Lovely.
As far as for ANY fire warning, pax or freight aircraft, I'm landing as soon as possible, even if the fire warning has gone out, as there is NO WAY for me to determine if the fire is indeed extinguished or not.
For carriage of certain lithium batteries, the recommended procedure is "land immediately", which, if you're over water means ditch the damn thing.
Lovely.
As far as for ANY fire warning, pax or freight aircraft, I'm landing as soon as possible, even if the fire warning has gone out, as there is NO WAY for me to determine if the fire is indeed extinguished or not.
https://aviation-safety.net/database...?id=20110728-0
And you'd think they would learn after one of their own crashed due to a fire in 2011.
And you'd think they would learn after one of their own crashed due to a fire in 2011.
Lithium batteries on board with a fire.
Boeing could not confirm the safety of Lithium battery transport, yet many operators still carry them.
Dollars worth more than lives!
Boeing could not confirm the safety of Lithium battery transport, yet many operators still carry them.
Dollars worth more than lives!
Why does Asiana state they have a Captain onboard. Sounds like they just have copilots who receive all needed inflight direction from the company. They will save money flying without Captains!
presumably you're joking? pilots in the air shouldn't get into speculation about what may/may not be setting off a smoke alarm; it should simply be treated as a possible fire
Departed Singapore Northbound with a 747 freighter, just past Kuala Lumpur got a main deck fire warning, but no sign of smoke or distress observed having sent a spare crew member down to the cargo deck with a fire extinguisher. Turned back towards Kuala Lumpur but then realised that we had to spend time dumping fuel down to landing weight anyway, so continued back to Singapore and started dumping. As we landed the fire warning light went out.
Previous flight had been full of Durians, the heavy, cloying vapour had fooled the sensors, but of course we didn't know that.
But I agree, one doesn't always know, and each case is different, he could have held over ANC to get down to landing weight if that was a problem, but one is never really very far from a "suitable " airport twixt LAX and ANC.
Previous flight had been full of Durians, the heavy, cloying vapour had fooled the sensors, but of course we didn't know that.
But I agree, one doesn't always know, and each case is different, he could have held over ANC to get down to landing weight if that was a problem, but one is never really very far from a "suitable " airport twixt LAX and ANC.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 2,514
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The ETOPS requirements for fire suppression now apply to all passenger jets, regardless of the number of engines. In fact, nearly all the ETOPS requirements except engine reliability apply to passenger quads. It's been that way since around 2010 IIRC.
Is that all pax jets, or all newly certified pax jets? Our NB Airbii only have one bottle, with one shot, for two cargo compartments. I'm told that the probability of detecting smoke in both compartments on one flight is very low.
