|
CAL 747 takes off with improperly closed door.
http://www.airliners.net/discussions...ines#ID3759501
HOw far did the door open up? edit: Seems the door was just not properly closed and the sensors didnt pick it up. http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/biz/.../22/2003393702 |
The 747 doors have two panels top and bottom which open first to equalise pressure should there be any residual pressurization. When the doors is closed, it's usually close from outside (if ground staff are available) so that these panels can be confirmed closed as it's not possible to check them from inside. If you get airborne with one open, it should close as the aircraft pressurizes. If it doesn't, I gather it gets a bit noisy. I suspect this is what happened in this case. A bit of a non event, but one which need to sorted by landing back.
This incidednt was also repoerted in this morning's South China Morning Post with tales of screaming passengers thinking they were going to die. Incidently, there is a procedure for smoke removal in the 747 which has the doors opened partially in flight. Strops to hold them in position are carried in the aircraft. |
There is no way a cabin door on the main deck will open fully due to the way they open (unless there is a MAJOR mechanical failure). The report infers to the non aviation person that this was a catastrophe.
Although speculation at this time, I would suggest that the interior handle popped up a bit during take off (the handle/closing mechanism perhaps not rigged correctly). My fourpenneth worth. |
Small point of order Dan, with respect.
The upper and lower gates actually fold back to allow the "plug door" to fit through the cutout during opening and closing. Like all plug doors, it's actually larger than the hole. :ok: |
DW
"Incidently, there is a procedure for smoke removal in the 747 which has the doors opened partially in flight. Strops to hold them in position are carried in the aircraft." Never seen or heard of these in 15 years :confused::confused: |
Originally Posted by Dan Winterland
Incidently, there is a procedure for smoke removal in the 747 which has the doors opened partially in flight. Strops to hold them in position are carried in the aircraft."
Originally Posted by nitro rig driver
Never seen or heard of these in 15 years
|
Never seen or heard of these in 15 years |
Not about doors but almost the same:
Boeing has an instruction video showing all types with a cockpit window open(ing) during take off. The idea is not to abort as it shows it is safe to continue. Gets a bit noisy though. |
Tying the doors open on a 400?
Are you sure about this? Never seen this procedure for a classic. Asked a friend that flies the 400, he just laughed. On the classic and most likely the 400 too. Door open light, non event. Cargo door then big issue. Really surprised how this even makes it into the news. |
I have been flying the 747 since 1984 and certainly on the classic we had a drill to partially open the main deck doors for smoke removal once depressurised - doors 4 if i remember correctly. The door handle was then held in place by tying rope around it. I now fly the 744F and cannot remember if the pax version had the same drill as the classic but I believe it did. I remember practicing the procedure one year in the cabin trainer. Of course the -F doesn't have a door 4 so it is irrelevant.
As the following QRH drill shows a door open light is a non event if the pressurisation is operating correctly. Condition: Main deck entry door not closed and latched condition sensed. PRESSURIZATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .CHECK Check pressurization system for normal operation. If pressurization system indicates normal operation, continue normal flight. DOOR ENTRY L 1, 5 The smoke removal procedure (below - for 744F) is a lot more complicated and requires an immediate landing if the smoke persists. Having read a statistic that no aircraft has survived more than 15 minutes with a genuine fire on board, the drill is somewhat hypothetical as with wait times to see if the smoke dissipates it would doubtless take a lot longer than 15 minutes! SMOKE/FUMES/FIRE ELECTRICAL Condition: Electrical smoke/fumes/fire identified. OXYGEN MASKS (If required). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .ON CREW COMMUNICATIONS (If required). . . . . . . . ESTABLISH FLIGHT DECK FAN SWITCH. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .OFF [Removes flight deck fan as a possible source of smoke/fumes.] If smoke/fumes/fire source known: ELECTRICAL POWER (Affected equipment) . . . .REMOVE If practical, remove power from affected equipment by switch or circuit breaker in flight deck or upper deck. If smoke/fumes/fire persists or source unknown: UPPER DECK READING LIGHTS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .ON Instruct supernumeraries to turn on upper deck reading lights. [Prepares upper deck reading lights before removing power from utility busses. Removing power from utility busses results in loss of upper deck lighting except for passenger signs and reading lights.] PASSENGER SIGNS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .ON [Prepares cabin lighting before removing power from utility busses.] UTILITY POWER SWITCHES (Both). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .OFF [Removes electrical power from possible sources of smoke/fumes. Removes equipment cooling supply fan as a possible source of smoke/fumes.] If smoke/fumes/fire persists or source unknown: (continued) If center wing tank pump switches ON: LEFT CENTER WING TANK PUMP SWITCH. . . . . . .OFF Do not turn the Left Center Wing Tank Pump switch ON if the FUEL OVD CTR L message displays. [Override pumps 2 and 3, commanded on by center wing tank pump failure, return to armed after approximately five minutes.] MAIN PUMP 1 AND 4 SWITCHES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .OFF When the FUEL LOW CTR R message displayed: MAIN PUMP 1 AND 4 SWITCHES . . . . . . . . . . . . . .ON RIGHT CENTER WING TANK PUMP SWITCH. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .OFF If the FUEL OVD CTR R message displays in cruise: RIGHT CENTER WING TANK PUMP SWITCH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .ON MAIN PUMP 1 AND 4 SWITCHES. . . . . . . . . . .OFF When the FUEL LOW CTR R message displayed: MAIN PUMP 1 AND 4 SWITCHES. . . . . . . . . .ON RIGHT CENTER WING TANK PUMP SWITCH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .OFF Resume normal fuel management. Do not accomplish the following checklists: ELEC UTIL BUS L, R FUEL OVRD 2, 3 FWD FUEL PRESS CTR L FUEL PUMP 2, 3 FWD Plan to land at the nearest suitable airport. |
I've flown the classic and the 400 in two airlines. Both had the procedure, even though the classic was a freighter conversion. The stops are webbing straps, orange in colour and have a loop sewn at each end. The aircraft is de-pressurised, the L1 and L5 doors are opend with the strops in place which restain the door at about the third open position. One end loops around the door handle, the other end I can't remember. And I can't remember where they are stowed.
I remember being shown the strop and it's use with the comment it was a last ditch desparation procedure. It's probable that some airlines have decided not to carry the strops which would account for the lack of knowledge of the procedure amongst some experienced 747 pilots. |
"Cracking Doors"
Just finished my B747-400 conversion where we were taught the procedure for opening doors or 'Cracking the Doors' inflight.
|
Dan is absolutely correct re smoke removal inflight by opening either one or two main deck doors. Depends where the source of smoke is whether one or both doors (L2 & L4) need to be "cracked" open. Procedure has its own checklist, cabin crew are fully briefed & trained. Obviously be coordinated from the flight deck if the Captain deems it necessary.
|
Sorry,
I stand corrected, there is a procedure for this still in place for some classic companies. |
It's a Boeing procedure for the B747 classic & B744...well this thread exposes many duds, wannabes and flt sim aces!!!
|
TAKE-OFF with DOORS OPEN and SLIDES DEPLOYED
For those of you who like a good story this is one even if the telling is average.
MEA (Middle East Airlines) during a stage of the war in Lebanon used to base its crews and aircraft on the Island of Cyprus. One day a number of MEA staff were being dead-headed with the aircraft to Cyprus. After boarding, on a remote stand, a gunmen boarded the aircraft and demanded to be taken .... somewhere .. The pilots said they couldn't get out of the parking bay. The gunman insisted. At some stage during this process the passengers (MEA staff) decided to exit the aircraft via the slides. So that left the doors open (not sure how many but more than one) with sides deployed. The cunning FE suggested closing the doors and just jumped ship. Engines were started. The Captain reversed out of the bay. And proceed to the end of the runway (doors open slides flapping). In the lined up position the Captain told the Hijacker the aircraft couldn't take off with the doors open and that they would crash ! The hijacker insisted they depart. So with hope and prayers they started their take-off run, slides deflated, doors blew almost closed (stayed ajar) and with flapping slides they left the ground. SO THAT MAY ANSWER SOME OF YOUR QUESTIONS ABOUT THE SAFETY IMPLICATIONS OF DOOR OPEN IN FLIGHT (IN A 707 AT LEAST) BOEING BUILDS THEM WELL. Anyway the flight went to Cyprus returned to Lebanon and the hijacker was picked up by his militia buddies after landing back at Beirut. I must apologize as I cannot recollect the details of the event as described to me by my father many years ago, but you get the idea. If anyone is interested or wants to challenge the (general) authenticity of the story I am more than happy to get the details and proof if i can. Later |
Since we are in ultimate anorak-mode on this thread......
Anybody who has ever worked on a B747 300 or 400 in pax configuration knows that its ventilation system is insufficient to remove heavy concentrations of smoke. Which is why it has the smoke removal procedure best described by preset. It is a procedure thought up by Boeing company and about as iffy as the 747 all pax ditching procedure where a hapless FA is supposed to walk out onto the wing in her stockinged feet to attach a ditching rope to an attachment point on the wing. It can maybe work in theory, but it's a bloody unlikely scenario. mr Winterland, who opens and closes aircraft doors in normal operation is not mandated by Boeing. Where you work it's done by ground staff, where I work it's done by the FA who is responsible for that particular door. Same goes for how to tie the door(s) that are cracked for smoke removal. Some companies have webbed strops, others have lengths of general purpose rope. As to the assertion made by some here that an improperly closed door is a non-event, lets add some shading to that shall we? From the cockpit it's a non-event. You know that it won't kill anybody and you are sat away from the noise that such a door produces. Ensconced behind your reinforced door, loaded with training to deal with all manner of deeply scary situations, a leaky door is a non-event. ;) Now let's look at it from a cabin point of view. FA sits right next to the door, as do a few rows of pax. You take off and the door starts creaking and making a hell of a noise. WTF! It gets really unfunny right there. A seasoned FA knows that most door noise will disappear once the AC is fully pressurised. The same seasoned FA also recognises non-standard door noise and will check that the door handle is in fully closed position and if not, try to push it down. If that doesn't help, sometimes a good whack at the door does the trick. As does stuffing loose bits of doorseal back into the frame. These actions need to be accomplished calmly but quickly and while talking reassuringly to a large-ish number of mesmerised and completely :eek: pax who are convinced they will be sucked out of the AC any second now. Trust me guys, in the cabin it is a bit of an event. :) mr IGh, what is the relevance of your post to this thread? We are discussing open doors in flight on a 747, and you pop up with the fact that a similar procedure was not FAA approved on the DC-9. :confused: |
Fire -Smoke Procedures FAA vs Non FAA
Question posed just above:
"... what is the relevance ... discussing open doors in flight on a 747 ... with the fact that a similar procedure was not FAA approved on the DC-9...." Studying various mishaps (since the fire aboard the "Star of Lisbon" in July 1946), one learns about the evolution of procedures against hidden fires, and one learns about the major design-weakness that forces the suggestion that we open DOORs (or hatches or Cockpit Windows) to help REMOVE SMOKE from the CABIN during the typical hidden-fire. [That design-weakness is the positioning of the Outflow Valve below the Cabin Floor, with no other smoke-chute to vent hot smoke from the ceiling-crown area.] So, attempting to gather some more information, I posed the finding from an earlier investigation regarding the use of DOORS in the SMOKE REMOVAL checklist. [Now Juud, is there an ignore-list for this forum? Please, add me to your ignore-list, so you needn't be offended in future.] |
mr IGh, a lippy FA posting on a pilot forum is an accident waiting to happen. I owe you an apology. Here it is: Sorry for my big mouth :)
The fact that I still don't quite understand the relevance (of the procedure being rejected because it would require a pilot in the cabin) is probably due to a lack of technical understanding on my part. Onwards and upwards and thank you for educating me on the position of the outflow valve and its relevance for smoke removal. :ok: |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 15:43. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.