Dangerous Goods (Air) Incidents/Accidents?
 

Does anybody have any DG Incidents or Accidents they would like to share so that other PPruners can beware?

Thanks in Advance

Valujet a few years ago springs to mind (as well covered on the "Black Box" documentary series made by Channel 4 in the UK and now shown - frequently - on Discovery Wings)

[This message has been edited by Wycombe (edited 04 May 2001).]

[This message has been edited by Wycombe (edited 04 May 2001).]

Let's not forget the current furror over the self-igniting Spanish lighters that seem to be so popular plastic-wrapped in your carton of cigarettes which you've placed in the hold with your baggage.

There was a baby elephant once that decided to go max power and break out of its crate. The captain asked the animal handler if he had a humane killer onboard. The answer was Yus sir! I have a tiger and a cobra!

------------------
We will do the drill according to the amendments to the amendments I er think?

I have seen a fair number of offences involving major airlines. In most cases the offending freight was loaded by agents, and there lies the problem. The airline is legally responsible, and will pay the fine, so it is as well to double and treble check the agent's paperwork - in your plentiful time at the gate that is!

The fine is one thing, the danger is, in the last analysis, a captain's problem.

There's a thread in Tech Log on this subject (Dry Ice...).
An agent is an agent; responsibility remains with the carrier. A carrier can always take care of these things by itself. (No I'm not involved with an agent). I think IATA calls it a General Ground Handling Service Agreement - standard contract, where the GHA is not responsible for anything.

------------------
rgds Rat

Is there anyone else out there who finds the whole Dangerous Goods thing a joke?

I mean for instance, are you fully au fait with the latest details on packaging of Radioactive materials? Are you in the habit of getting into the hold with a Geiger counter and tape measure to check it complies?
Bet you aren't.

Yes, the old 'Captain is ultimately responsible' line...the company wants it's income...the handling agent is held blameless...so there's only one guy to blame...the one with the absolute least control over what the hell he's signing for!

Capt Sensible.
I've no axe to grind. As a L/M, my butt is on the line just like yours (assuming yr a capt).
My previous is FACT.
Don't bother blaming a handling agent. Why? Because an agent is representing our respective companies. The company (& by default the likes of us) carry the can. In other terms, ABC handling agent can screw up for DEF airlines. ABC will have to answer for it (unless gross negligence involved). It is OUR responsibilty! As they love to tell me, "you can delegate tasks, but never responsibility".


------------------
rgds Rat

Cargorat,
As Capt Sensible says the responsibilty is with the Capt. Not the agent not even the L/M - the Capt!!

Yes I have had problems with the Dangerous Goods act as an engineer.

Try getting a slide pack or liferaft, or even a lifejacket to an AOG !

As a matter of interest I was involved with shipping some oxy generators just after the Valujet thing. Again I requested the units but they were shipped via an "agent"
They were put on a flight and when they arrived all hell broke loose. Everybody and his dog (including moi!) was hauled into investigations by the FAA.
The crux of the story that there is no official way to make these emergency notifications after an incident like Value jet. It was done by the FAA to Airlines but as far as the cargo agent was concerned the IATA carriage of dangerous goods legislation allowed carriage of up to three units on a passenger aircraft !

We were just told don't do it again !!!

Again as a side line the O2 generators carried on the Valuejet aircraft are from DC10 which are mechanicaly triggered with a strike plunger and can be activated by hitting them - the L1011 generators are electrically ignited and can only be triggered by a current.

As an L/M you might take a look at the IATA manual and see if there is a new definition they were originally just classifed as chloric chemical devices (You have to be a smart "agent " to know that is an Oxygen generator !!)



[This message has been edited by GotTheTshirt (edited 05 May 2001).]

Got The TShirt,
Oxygen Generators are CAO (Cargo Aircraft Only. The Propper Shipping Name now reflects this.
Don't have the manual here at home, so can't give you page numbers.
A carrier is responsible for it's agents. The carrier has to verify what it is carrying. The only way out is if a shipper (nb:not agent) deliberately cheats. That is a crime.


------------------
rgds Rat

Regarding the "Spanish lighters" - I have seen the matter twice on this section, but it vanished "off the page" very quickly.

I started a thread on the "Pax/Slf" section, where I thought it would do more good, but there was very little factual response. (the thread's still there if anyone wants to nip over to the section to enlighten the customers about this one - or any other pax-related dangerous goods issues)

------------------
What goes around . . .
. . often lands better!

WE carried Bank Data for a large Currier, who wanted to fill out the load with "rush" general cargo. They supplied a written undertaking it would have no DG in.
Often while loading I would find and off load automotive paint or toxic farm chemicals.

How would You clasify 100Kg of worm untested human blood in a C172 ATO. BioHazard ?

------------------
FlySafe

Good question: i think untested blood could well be classified as "Infectious Substances" class 6.2 (or is it 6.3?)

------------------
rgds Rat

6.2 but only if it is capable of speadin the pathogen...

As for the lighter subject lets start the thread again...It is a matter of safety..

So..am i to get this right...Is the reason airlines have operator variations is so that they can impose stricter regulations than IATA?
Do they do this becausre they know if something is undecleared or classified wrongly by the agent then they are at fault? (airlines)? I understand that the shipper is always to blame if they can prove that he was intentionally lying...what if he wasn't? the Freight Forwarder would be liable?

Just a thought...and a question...

Keep it going..I beleive this is a topic many people were afraid to touch on..

Thanks in advance

Surely you won't know if the blood is capable of spreading a pathogen until it's tested. That's why untested blood should be 6.2 until proven otherwise.
The shipper will get hammered for lying. Those guys in China responsible for writing off the Malaysian A330 are in for millions in damages. Undeclared barrels of improperly packed DG split open in flight. Can't remember all the details.
Carrier variations are more restrictve than IATA regs. I believe SQ ban everything except class 9 into the States. CX had a ban on Gallium on all their aircraft after an acccident. (Nasty stuff Gallium; stable when kept cold, highly corrosive if it gets warm).


------------------
rgds Rat

733SS,

Not much point restarting the "lighters" thread again as it drops off the page too fast - seems like nobody is very interested http://www.pprune.org/ubb/NonCGI/confused.gif - I never saw any 'hard facts' on it, or on the one I started in the SLF section. Does nobody know the facts behind the reported incident that prompted it - apparently a fire in the hold of a flight returning from the Med somewhere??

Lighters are DG with a UN number etc Don't have a manual in front of me. Monday.

------------------
rgds Rat

Cargorat,

Can you send me some more info on the SQ stuff? Also,I am interested to hear about the "gallium"....

I agree with you on 6.2.....

Anymore..I want keep the thread going...

Thanks

737SS
I need to look in the DG Manual. Operator variations are in the front somewhere along with State variations.
Like to join us on the brand new hot off the press Freight Dogs Forum?
Perhaps one of the Cathay guys can brief us on the Gallium story. If I remember correctly, the stuff burned right through the fuselage in the air.


------------------
rgds Rat

Let me in on...that would be great...

CargoRat,
as a non freightie can you tell me who compiles and is responsible for the update of the DG manual.
Is it IATA?
As I mentioned earlier after the Valujet incident the FAA got in on the act with a notice to Airlines but we got off because the DG manual had not been ammended and the agent was not on the FAA mailing list. I was in the US at this time so how was it handled in UK/EU.
I remember quite clearly during my intergogation - sorry interview with the Feds that the agents manual allowed up to three of these ( as I mentioned not called Oxygen generators but chloric chemical units) to be carried on a passenger aircraft.
I was just the innocent bystander as I had orderd 3 units from base ( Maimi no less!) and they shipped them. I was only involved because they were addressed to me.!!

IATA updates the manual. A new one every year; this year's one is the 42nd edition. Its up to the airline/agent to ensure they are using the correct manual (I would have thought). IATA's address is in the book.

------------------
rgds Rat

I thought that the FAA would be checking if in compliance to the 49CFR as opposed to the IATA DGR considering the state variations in the USA are more restrictive as mentioned in the IATA DGR....just a thought...Cargorat...any news on the forum?

Personal experience from the late '70s.

TN had a contract for carrying core trays from the local acid plant that supplied mines to move their filter cores- large heavycast frames with fibregalss filters contained by cast mesh.
We asked if they were cleaned- loaded them in the Transit and off to the airport.
No probs - UNTIL _ whe upended them loading the F27-100 VH-TFC at WNY. As soon as they were upended they pissed acid all over us and the front hold of the aircraft.

We bumped them - called engineering and management - and the whole thing was kept very hush hush - despite the fact we had blistered hands and the M tar was turned white by the acid. Cleaned up Foxy Charlie as best we could and recalled engineering. She was to be thoroughly checked on arrival.

We were later told that TN did not report the incident and were suitably narked - also TFC went in for a D check 6 months later and was retired due to severe corrosion below the forward cargo bay. Later sold by AAS to an Indo operator SMAC Air I believe.

Such was the '70s culture. Was in the same position with EW at DPO years later - Airport Manager/Loco/Porter/Cleaner - drum arrived on night flight an porter called me over - drum was epoxy - cracked and part B leaking on top - was just starting to expand after the flight from SYD - dragged it out quick and nailed the turkey waiting for it.Didnt tell EW until AFTER the DOA incident report docs were lodged. There is no other way. Be sure - get the paperwork underway before some marketing ****** intervenes. Chrges were laid. The goods were declared - falsely. A diversion or hold of 20 minutes could have been catastrophic or at least disabled an aeroplane for weeks.

Be safe

Regards

EWL.

737SS. The forum exists since yesterday lunchtime (GMT)! Look for "Freight Dogs" in "Other Aircrew Forums". We hijacked the old "Europe" forum & Capt PPRuNe/PPRuNe Towers agreed to rename it. We're in business!

------------------
rgds Rat

Cargo Rat,

Thanks for the info but how do they bring out anything urgent between issues?

As 737SS the FAA are responsible for CFR compliance but then ( as in my case) they only notified the airlines. I guess the FAA have no way of even knowing who freight forwarders are.
Again in my case the IATA refeernce and paperwork were correct for the IATA manual in force that day. I even got a copy of the dangerous goods form that the Captain signed.

The reason that the FEDS did not nail us ( the agent that is) was that legally they did have their act together.
From what you are saying CargoRat nothing has really changed and there doesnt really seem to be leakproof( pardon the pun!) system.

Hmmm. Now I have to make an educated guess. The State Variations in the front of the manual (ie all the USG-n) probably reflect the additional requirements of CFR. Think about it. Do you know the state requirements for lets say Uganda? Neither do I. But if you were to ship some DG down there, all you'd have to do is look in IATA DGR & see if they had any other restrictions/requirements.


------------------
rgds Rat

Are oxidizing generators forbidden by air transport in the US now do to the Value Jet Crash?

I came across the the other day and I didn't know what to say in retrospect..
I am not sure of the CFR but I know I didn't find anything in the Section 2 - State variations....Anybody have an idea?

Thanks for the input of the 70's stories...I see things haven't changed much considering people are still screwing with DG and be ignorant of the fact...

I caught up on an old thread..A woman brought " Sulpheric acid" abboard undeclared and it leaked throught the overhead baggage hold. People were hurt.

Ignorance of the fact or just stupidity...??

I understand now that the General Civil Aviation Authroity of the United Arab Emirates are evaluating new DG instructors..apparently do to legislation they can only instruct to other people within the company they are hired in. They evaluate the syllabus for approval...I think this is quite comprehensive considering the UAE is a small country with lots of import and export..I am glad they are making an effort...ANy other countries fall in the same catagory?