PPRuNe Forums

PPRuNe Forums (https://www.pprune.org/)
-   Rumours & News (https://www.pprune.org/rumours-news-13/)
-   -   JetBlue emergency evac in Bahamas (https://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/387656-jetblue-emergency-evac-bahamas.html)

Eboy 4th Sep 2009 05:08

JetBlue emergency evac in Bahamas
 

A JetBlue aircraft with 93 people onboard caught fire on its left side as it was landing in the Caribbean Thursday afternoon, prompting an emergency evacuation on an airport taxiway, the airline said.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/04/wo...e.html?_r=1&hp

Avman 4th Sep 2009 07:51


The plane landed safely and moved under its own power to a taxiway, where fire fighters quickly arrived and put out the fire.
No lessons learned from Manchester then!!! (yes, I know, it was an aborted take-off, but it's the same principle). Aircraft should stop as quickly as possible and evacuate immediately. To hell with blocking the runway. What price a life?

lomapaseo 4th Sep 2009 12:20


No lessons learned from Manchester then!!! (yes, I know, it was an aborted take-off, but it's the same principle). Aircraft should stop as quickly as possible and evacuate immediately. To hell with blocking the runway. What price a life?
Today 01:08
Considering it was am EMB190 I doubt that the aircraft spent much time in rollout on the runway. I suspect that the decision to evacuate was made within seconds of assessing that there was a fire.

GearDown&Locked 4th Sep 2009 13:10

If you can shorten the distance between your "crippled" plane and the emergency vehicles - and the situation is properly assessed meanwhile - it could help improving the survival probabilities of your pax. Stopping on a remote runway with a a couple of chutes that didn't deploy on a burning plane, and you'd wish those fire engines would be closer.

Avman 4th Sep 2009 13:18

With respect, I suggest you both read up on the Manchester report and think again.

Cymmon 4th Sep 2009 17:54

I must agree Avman. Slight error in turning into wind and all hell let loose.
Better to stop asap, then get everyone off.
No need for the Firefighters if everyone is on the tarmac. The plane is expendable, the passengers are not.

varkdriver495 4th Sep 2009 18:21

jetblue emergency evac
 
With all due respect, for all to pass judgement based on sketchy newspaper reporting...unbelievable. Each fire situation is unique in its own right...I'm sure in retrospect, some things might have been done differently...but, give me a break...Manchester was a catastrophic, uncontained engine explosion...who knows what happened with the JB Emb190. Give it a rest, thank goodness everyone got out alright.

Avman 4th Sep 2009 18:27

Sorry vd495, but fire is fire, I don't care where or why it starts. I'd like to get out asap, thank you. No, I won't give it a rest - my life may depend on it!

varkdriver495 4th Sep 2009 18:35

Av,

No one is minimizing the need to egress quickly after a fire...what concerns me is your rush to judge this crew and their actions, armed with a news article! Your reaction is what I might expect from a non-aviator, not one from an individual in the business. Just my opinion.

Locked door 4th Sep 2009 18:40

Avman,

I think you're oversimplifying, especially on big jets. We expect one serious injury per evac and one fatality per two evacs. That means there's a 50% chance that when you initiate an evac you'll cause a fatality. Yes, in a Manchester scenario throw them out the side asap. However if the fire indications cease after the fire eng checklist then it's definitely worth thinking twice.

Just my two pennies worth.

LD

Avman 4th Sep 2009 20:04

vd495, because it was the New York Times and not The Sun or Daily Mirror. Furthermore, the bit "The plane landed safely and moved under its own power to a taxiway" was not the type of reporting one would have expected to read in most newspapers. It wasn't my intention to criticise the crew, but more to point out that when fire is involved, hesitation and/or delay may prove fatal. I imagined that FD crew may have been inclined to want to be "helpful" (to ATC) and vacate the runway (I believe Nassau only has a single runway).

Locked Door, I accept your point, but this was an EMB-190.

TowerDog 4th Sep 2009 23:20


it was landing in the Caribbean Thursday afternoon,
Bahamas is not in the Caribbean and never was. The islands are located in the North Atlantic just like Bermuda. :=

(I know the newspaper got it wrong, not the thread starter)

varkdriver495 5th Sep 2009 01:15

Av,

Your trust in NYtimes reporting accuracy is admirable, but I would suggest remaining a bit more skeptical and inquisitive...questioning the veracity of each line of print when it comes to facts. I might even include your remark about the FD crew wanting to be "helpful", as one that might be off base. Wait til the safety review comes out before we hang these airmen out to dry. Again, are you in the flying business, or do you naturally enter a discussion armed with feelings ablaze?

cheers,
varkdriver495

LimaFoxTango 5th Sep 2009 04:06


Bahamas is not in the Caribbean and never was. The islands are located in the North Atlantic just like Bermuda.
Using that theory, I'd guess Barbados is not part of the Caribbean either seeing as it is completely surrounded by the Atlantic ocean.

PappyJ 5th Sep 2009 07:00


...especially on big jets...
I thought Jetblue flew the A320 and the Embraer?

hetfield 5th Sep 2009 08:39


Bermuda and the Turks and Caicos Islands which are found in the Atlantic Ocean are Associate members of the Caribbean Community, and the same goes for the Commonwealth of the Bahamas which is a full member of the Caribbean Community.'
wiki.......

411A 5th Sep 2009 09:02


...because it was the New York Times ...
These folks are lucky to get the time of day correct, let alone aircraft fire details...:rolleyes:

Avman 5th Sep 2009 11:08

Stay cool guys, especially you JBU guys ;)

dicksorchard 5th Sep 2009 17:35

Saudia Flight 163
 
The above aircraft landed safely yet 300 people died .

From what i have read this was due to Pilot error , and a delay in evacuating the passengers and the lack of coordination of the emergency srvices.

The fire consumed the aircraft on the ground, killing everyone aboard.

People cannot be to complacent when dealing with the issue of fire on board an aircraft the smallest fire can become the biggest killer .

I for one would want to be off that aircraft Asap . I think you guys are being a little unfair to Avman .

Two's in 5th Sep 2009 18:27


We expect one serious injury per evac and one fatality per two evacs. That means there's a 50% chance that when you initiate an evac you'll cause a fatality. Yes, in a Manchester scenario throw them out the side asap. However if the fire indications cease after the fire eng checklist then it's definitely worth thinking twice.
http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs...rp_rpt_002.pdf

This report doesn't agree with those statistics. It says that if evacuation slides are used there is a 50% chance of an injury. Study group of 142 slide evacuations in the Annex has zero fatailites, so if your figures indicate there is a 50% chance of a fatality for each evacuation, I would be suspicious of your data, or very worried about your airline of choice.


All times are GMT. The time now is 03:26.


Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.