Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Rumours & News
Reload this Page >

BA422 smoke incident Valencia

Rumours & News Reporting Points that may affect our jobs or lives as professional pilots. Also, items that may be of interest to professional pilots.

BA422 smoke incident Valencia

Old 6th Aug 2019, 12:41
  #41 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 848
Rant aside: Wonder what others would do, go straight to the Smoke/Fumes removal checklist as you realistically don't have time to run the identification checklist, or just focus 100% on landing ASAP?
giggitygiggity is offline  
Old 6th Aug 2019, 12:56
  #42 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Qwerty
Posts: 379
ITV reporting that they had a news editor on board who suggests it took ten minutes to evacuate after coming to a stop,

Jonathan Wald said a "panic-stricken stewardess" struggled to open the plane door, leaving them stuck inside the smoke-filled plane 10 minutes after it had landed.

​​​​​​I wonder if this is a case of British journalistic sensationalism at its very worst.
Council Van is offline  
Old 6th Aug 2019, 13:12
  #43 (permalink)  
RHS
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 106
Originally Posted by Council Van View Post
ITV reporting that they had a news editor on board who suggests it took ten minutes to evacuate after coming to a stop,

Jonathan Wald said a "panic-stricken stewardess" struggled to open the plane door, leaving them stuck inside the smoke-filled plane 10 minutes after it had landed.

​​​​​​I wonder if this is a case of British journalistic sensationalism at its very worst.
What do you think? Doesn’t look very “panic stricken” to me from the videos!
RHS is offline  
Old 6th Aug 2019, 14:17
  #44 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Qwerty
Posts: 379
Originally Posted by RHS View Post


What do you think? Doesn’t look very “panic stricken” to me from the videos!
I was trying to be polite about Journalist's 😉
I suspect he is talking a load of ****
Council Van is offline  
Old 6th Aug 2019, 14:47
  #45 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: U.K.
Age: 64
Posts: 376
Snoop Capt Tristan Loraine interviewed by BBC

BBC (Regional as not important enough for national radio) Interview former BA Capt Tristan Loraine:

If you would like to go to the 13th ANNUAL CABIN AIR conference in London on 17/18 September 2019 https://www.aircraftcabinair.com/

Why would there be 13 conferences, if there was NO problem??

DB
Dream Buster is offline  
Old 6th Aug 2019, 15:03
  #46 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Midwest US
Age: 64
Posts: 62
I suspect that it's more muscle memory in a stressful situation that accounts for why so many pax attempt to evacuate with bags. Each and every other time they have exited an aircraft they took cabin bags with them, so it may not really be a conscious decision to grab the luggage.

In any case I would prefer the crew to be focused on completing the evacuation and not on docketing pax with bags for future punishment!
twb3 is offline  
Old 6th Aug 2019, 15:29
  #47 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Newcastle
Posts: 46
Originally Posted by Dominator2 View Post
I think that so many of you are missing the point. If an aircraft suffers from smoke, fumes, mist or and other unannounced substance in the air then carry out the SMOKE AND FUMES Emergency drill.

If the front end put on their masks and declared an Emergency then why was that not carried out in the cabin. I would rather breath Oxygen for ten minutes as a precaution than be killed by some poisonous particles in the cabin air conditioning.

Saying that because no one was injured the cabin crew performed their job correctly is ridiculous.

I am assuming that the whole crew has been grounded pending a full investigation by BA and if need be by the CAA?

Completely agree with your post. Why was an immediate evacuation not declared upon landing, are the reports of 10 minutes sitting on the ground before getting off accurate? I've seen some pretty worrying cabin crew competence on BA flights over the years... but that's for another day. The number of suitcases being carried down the slide on that photo are also extremely worrying.

The current BA safety video detracts from the essential message it is trying to convey and should be scrapped - clear, concise messages are needed. Maybe the authorities need to work that into their regulations.
milhouse999 is offline  
Old 6th Aug 2019, 16:01
  #48 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Canadian Shield
Posts: 536
Remarkable. No-one has posted the VLC METAR yet...

And not one passenger has been quoted as "considering legal action".

I suspect that both will be along shortly!
er340790 is offline  
Old 6th Aug 2019, 16:12
  #49 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 848
Originally Posted by er340790 View Post
remarkable. No-one has posted the vlc metar yet...

And not one passenger has been quoted as "considering legal action".

I suspect that both will be along shortly! :e
LEVC 051600z 470/89kt CAVOK 78/-51 Q851 NOSIG
giggitygiggity is offline  
Old 6th Aug 2019, 16:12
  #50 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: U.K.
Age: 64
Posts: 376
BBC Panorama 2008 - Passenger legal action...

A BBC Panorama covered previous UK passenger legal action in 2008 - but they never told the public how it ended up.....I wonder why?


No evidence?

Errr...No.

DB
Dream Buster is offline  
Old 6th Aug 2019, 16:15
  #51 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Cyprus
Age: 72
Posts: 261
i believe it was probably a pack failure they are located in the centre of the aircraft where the bang came from hence condensation mixed with a bit of oil
As the a/c did not depressurise no oxygen masks needed. Also as the a/c landed safely
I with no fire the crew took some time to decide whether to use the slides, as there use is not without risk.
Lets see what comes out of the investigation but I believe the flight crew handled this incident well
Walnut is offline  
Old 6th Aug 2019, 16:45
  #52 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 1998
Posts: 84
Originally Posted by Auxtank View Post
And the prize for the rudest person on this thread goes to you.

Easy to see why the two are similar for the reasons given.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t_9pAXcWKm4

Not even vaguely similar in severity.

Stick to FS98, my friend.
A340Yumyum is offline  
Old 6th Aug 2019, 16:55
  #53 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Outside the Fence
Age: 68
Posts: 333
giggitygiggity,

Thank you for your ranting and rather rude post. Yes, I am a pilot of 41 years experience and thankfully none completed in the commercial world. All of my flying career was spent as a Military Aviator defending Queen and Country. In the RAF we chose to protect our rear crew by providing over pressure/100% oxygen and masks. I was, therefore, educated by your discourteous answer to my post. Clearly, you are another who has been brain washed by the system?

I incorrectly assumed that the civilian sector provided better protection for it's passengers! I suspect that over the ages this is just another area where safety has been eroded? The financial imperative to reduce weight, reduce fuel burn, reduce costs against providing a safe environment to fly in. All very well for the pilots to safely land the aircraft but if all of the passengers are dead due to asphyxiation, then they have failed.

Thanks Milhouse999, for providing some reasoned sanity into the discussion. Once again this incident highlights a number of issue where Commercial Interest outweigh Flight Safety and common sense. When will the Regulators or the airlines sort out the mess that is too much luggage and other rubbish in the cabin. The hold is designed to carry luggage and that is where it should go. This would then significantly reduce the problems of bags during an evacuation.

Who will be the first to take the lead and enforce Flight Safety First?
Dominator2 is offline  
Old 6th Aug 2019, 17:21
  #54 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: The Winchester
Posts: 5,838
Originally Posted by Dominator2 View Post
giggitygiggity,

Thank you for your ranting and rather rude post. Yes, I am a pilot of 41 years experience and thankfully none completed in the commercial world. All of my flying career was spent as a Military Aviator defending Queen and Country. In the RAF we chose to protect our rear crew by providing over pressure/100% oxygen and masks. I was, therefore, educated by your discourteous answer to my post. Clearly, you are another who has been brain washed by the system?

I incorrectly assumed that the civilian sector provided better protection for it's passengers! I suspect that over the ages this is just another area where safety has been eroded? The financial imperative to reduce weight, reduce fuel burn, reduce costs against providing a safe environment to fly in. All very well for the pilots to safely land the aircraft but if all of the passengers are dead due to asphyxiation
You're comparing apples with oranges, or in other words comparing a system designed to support the life of the stringently selected highly trained mortals who are potentially going to have to operate at high level whilst going to war verses a system that will support a member of the general population ( aged from babe in arms though to perhaps 100+ ) to survive long enough for the crew to take actions to improve the environment in the cabin.

Like me in my former life you probably enjoyed the delights of North Luffingham, aeromedical lectures and chamber runs, and were very familiar with '"the kit" because you used it everyday.

Compare and contrast with the training received by paying passengers in the commercial world... the passenger oxygen system needs to have masks that are extremely simple to don and operate..quickly... Even so there are videos/still images around of what passengers have managed to do in a crisis with simple masks when required to don them..(somebody will no doubt provide a link) ...I hate to think of the consequences of dropping them a pressure breathing type assembly.

Last edited by wiggy; 6th Aug 2019 at 17:47.
wiggy is offline  
Old 6th Aug 2019, 17:34
  #55 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 848
Originally Posted by Dominator2 View Post
giggitygiggity,
Thank you for your ranting and rather rude post. Yes, I am a pilot of 41 years experience and thankfully none completed in the commercial world. All of my flying career was spent as a Military Aviator defending Queen and Country. In the RAF we chose to protect our rear crew by providing over pressure/100% oxygen and masks. I was, therefore, educated by your discourteous answer to my post. Clearly, you are another who has been brain washed by the system?

I incorrectly assumed that the civilian sector provided better protection for it's passengers! I suspect that over the ages this is just another area where safety has been eroded? The financial imperative to reduce weight, reduce fuel burn, reduce costs against providing a safe environment to fly in. All very well for the pilots to safely land the aircraft but if all of the passengers are dead due to asphyxiation, then they have failed.

Who will be the first to take the lead and enforce Flight Safety First?
The rude tone was in response to what I interpreted as a rather rude and previous apportion of blame to the crew, which was based on assumption/incorrect info. I would have assumed that at some point you would had have seen the video/demo the of the oxygen mask onboard civil airliners, you can clearly see it isn't a forced pressure mask. Is the MRTT fitted with 250 forced oxygen masks for the troops? I don't wax lyrical about military flying because I haven't done it. Perhaps the same courtesy should be afforded towards us unlucky enough to be commercial pilots as obviously we need the sympathy.

I'm not sure what you mean by brainwashing? My biggest issue with people posting incorrect information is that this thread will undoutably be viewed by some enterprising Daily Mail journalist who will quote you verbatim and make the pilots look like rank amateurs: "One professional pilot asked why they didn't provide oxygen to the passengers, we're waiting for British Airways to give us a response"... In the age of the internet, misinformation is damaging (eg the damage done by one Twitter idiot today posting a picture of a lady sitting in a seat without a back onboard an easyjet flight. That spawned probably 20 articles from all the usual British news agencies within an hour.)
giggitygiggity is offline  
Old 6th Aug 2019, 17:35
  #56 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 12,058
Originally Posted by Walnut View Post
Also as the a/c landed safely with no fire the crew took some time to decide whether to use the slides, as there use is not without risk.
Time spent waiting/hoping in vain that they could get some steps to the aircraft while stopped on the RET, perhaps ?
DaveReidUK is offline  
Old 6th Aug 2019, 17:54
  #57 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: U.K.
Age: 64
Posts: 376
UNITE Call for public inquiry into AEROTOXIC - AGAIN...

Unite calls for toxic cabin air inquiry after British Airways fume event - AGAIN....

  • Tuesday 6 August 2019
The UK and Ireland’s largest union, Unite today (Tuesday 6 August) called for an inquiry into toxic cabin air and fume events on board jet airliners following yesterday’s (Monday 5 August) fume event on British Airways flight BA422 from London Heathrow to Valencia.

Demanding health and safety guarantees from British Airways for its members, Unite pointed to an analysis by toxic cabin air campaigners that suggests the same plane involved in yesterday’s incident suffered two prior fume events in June leading to the aircraft being grounded.

The analysis of industry sources also suggests that were over 40 fume events in June this year. Warning that this was just the tip of the ‘iceberg’ Unite called on the airline industry to ‘come clean’ over toxic cabin air and ‘clean up’ its act by using safer oil to lubricate jet engines and fitting cabin air filters on board planes.

Unite is currently supporting 51 high court actions against five UK airlines after independent expert evidence concluded that the air in most commercial airline cabins can cause irreversible neurological damage and chronic illness among susceptible individuals.

The union backed claims allege that expert medical evidence shows long term exposure to cabin air or to high dose ‘fume events’ can lead to pilots and crew members developing chronic ill health and life threatening conditions.

The expert evidence for the court, relied upon in the claims supported by Unite, reveals how fumes from jet engine bleed air used to pressurise airline cabins contains a mix of toxic compounds including organophosphates and TCP.

The 51 court cases involve pilots and cabin crew working for easyJet, British Airways, Thomas Cook, Jet2 and Virgin Atlantic. Unite is urging members involved in a fume event to get in touch and report it to its fume event register here.

Commenting Unite assistant general secretary for legal affairs Howard Beckett said: “This latest fume event is deeply alarming. British Airways has some serious questions to answer regarding the safety of the aircraft, in addition to providing health and safety guarantees for our cabin crew members.

“Far too often fume events like these go unreported and are brushed under the carpet by the airline industry. This latest fume event only came to light because members of the media were on board the flight.

“The airline industry cannot continue to hide from the issue of toxic cabin air whilst placing the health and safety of aircrew at risk.

“Independent expert evidence concludes that air on board jet planes can contain a toxic mix of chemicals and compounds that potentially damage the nervous system and may lead to chronic irreversible health problems in susceptible individuals.

“We need a public inquiry into the extent of fume events and toxic cabin air. The airline industry must start to take responsibility and clean up the cabin air on jet planes.

“We would urge anyone involved in a fume event to log it on our fume event register.”

ENDS

For more information journalists only please contact [email protected] Unite head of media and campaigns on 020 3371 2066 or 07967 665869

Notes to editors:
  • Unite is Britain and Ireland’s largest union with members working across all sectors of the economy. The general secretary is Len McCluskey.

Read the full article here: https://unitetheunion.org/news-events/news/2019/august/unite-calls-for-toxic-cabin-air-inquiry-after-british-airways-fume-event/?fbclid=IwAR0_bbG0GIipFCBbGQliLFmondYhQKK_TqxNNuk6ou_lMoFBh3 8sNC_GdkY
Dream Buster is offline  
Old 6th Aug 2019, 19:41
  #58 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: Marlow
Posts: 1
My friend was on the plane with his family. From a passengers perspective it sounded terrifying. Whether or not the pilots did the right thing I’m far from qualified to say but he said the cabin crew abandoned ship first leaving the passengers to work it out for themselves which sounds disgraceful. He says an off duty BA cabin crew member travelling with their family took over the evacuation in the absence of the crew who got off first(not the flight deck crew, just the cabin crew).

I appreciate the plane was full of smoke and things happened fast but according to him this is 100% what happened, if so this sounds completely unacceptable.
R15RJJ is offline  
Old 6th Aug 2019, 19:45
  #59 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Wiltshire U.K.
Posts: 28
Originally Posted by giggitygiggity View Post
Rant aside: Wonder what others would do, go straight to the Smoke/Fumes removal checklist as you realistically don't have time to run the identification checklist, or just focus 100% on landing ASAP?
The Swissair MD11 crash in '98 gives a clue.
Shackeng is offline  
Old 6th Aug 2019, 19:51
  #60 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Isla Grande
Posts: 947
Sorry to revert to topic.
What's your first glance impression by pictures, vids?

- smoke
- haze
- fumes
- condensation

????
gearlever is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.