Virgin Atlantic A330 precautionary evacuation at LGW
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: London
Age: 53
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Spotter's corner
Why not? Has a single commenter here been the least bit knowledgeable about the actual flight and situational details? No. the sum total of data in this thread at present doesn't add a lot of value over that telephoto photograph, from the parking lot, showing slides deployed.
Fun summer reading for today, but I'm happy to wait for the report for lessons learned.
Fun summer reading for today, but I'm happy to wait for the report for lessons learned.
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: On the ground too often
Age: 49
Posts: 127
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When the LOT Boeing 767 SP-LPC made a gear up landing last year, despite the fact that:
- it could be classified as a crash and not an emergency landing,
- the runway was covered in foam,
- there was plenty of smoke coming from the plane,
- parts of the plane were genuinely on fire,
- fire crews were extinguishing said fires during the evac,
- the pax and crew had experienced the fatigue of an 8 hour transatlantic flight and were definitely aware of the gravity of the situation,
somehow the CC managed to evacuate everyone without a single injury. So it can be done.
The outcome on British soil and on a British operated aircraft is not as favourable. Perhaps an eye-opener that the elfensafety terror is already bringing more harm than good.
- it could be classified as a crash and not an emergency landing,
- the runway was covered in foam,
- there was plenty of smoke coming from the plane,
- parts of the plane were genuinely on fire,
- fire crews were extinguishing said fires during the evac,
- the pax and crew had experienced the fatigue of an 8 hour transatlantic flight and were definitely aware of the gravity of the situation,
somehow the CC managed to evacuate everyone without a single injury. So it can be done.
The outcome on British soil and on a British operated aircraft is not as favourable. Perhaps an eye-opener that the elfensafety terror is already bringing more harm than good.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: East and West Mids UK
Posts: 108
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
re LOT lack of injuries.
I would think that an a/c on its arse vs an aircraft on its gear would have a significantly lower gradient to its slides, so pax exit velocity down them will be much lower and risk of injury sustained on leaving the end of the slide subsequently reduced/removed.
I would think that an a/c on its arse vs an aircraft on its gear would have a significantly lower gradient to its slides, so pax exit velocity down them will be much lower and risk of injury sustained on leaving the end of the slide subsequently reduced/removed.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Cairo
Posts: 57
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
777 has been evacuated without injury down the slides with a suspected engine fire. In large measure due to an assertive but composed crew who effectively paced the evacuation to make sure no-one was hurt. They had the advantage that they could see the ´fire´and the fire crew so knew they had time.Not so obvious if you think the fire is under your feet, but it is certainly the case that how the crew behave can affect how many people are injured. So whether ´screaming like a banshee´is an accurate description of her behaviour or was appropriate in the circumstances is subjective - just like this thread.
Their flight path looks as though they potentially dumped some fuel. Should this be the case would they do this and then evacuate when they land? The only thing I can think of is the situation worsen as they returned.
If there was smoke in the flight deck, and they thought a return was warranted (which of course it is), why did they take the time to fly south after their departure to SAM, the only thing I can think of is to dump fuel. Surely turning around heading directly back to LGW would not have left them too little track miles to descend?
If there was smoke in the flight deck, and they thought a return was warranted (which of course it is), why did they take the time to fly south after their departure to SAM, the only thing I can think of is to dump fuel. Surely turning around heading directly back to LGW would not have left them too little track miles to descend?
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: north of barlu
Posts: 6,207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
VJW
Ifyou had taken the trouble to read this thread you would know that the type of A330 can't dump fuel.
From the tone of your post it is clear that you have no idea about how long it takes to get an airliner to turn around and the distance that it takes to decend and slow the aircraft for landing.
Rather than post inaccurate rubbish I would respectfully suggest that you read the whole thread before posting.
There are posts from people who clearly know less than yourself but there are also some pearls of wisdom above and it is not hard to sort them out.
From the tone of your post it is clear that you have no idea about how long it takes to get an airliner to turn around and the distance that it takes to decend and slow the aircraft for landing.
Rather than post inaccurate rubbish I would respectfully suggest that you read the whole thread before posting.
There are posts from people who clearly know less than yourself but there are also some pearls of wisdom above and it is not hard to sort them out.
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: home
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As someone who was fortunate enough to watch this incident unfold from a very prime viewing point in a less stressful pointy end. I think it's only fair to add a couple of points.
1. The crew from what I could see and hear conducted themselves very well. As i could hear on the RT the decision to evacuate was not taken lightly. The situation was controlled but because the fire chief could not confirm the presence of smoke or the absence of it due to the jet efflux the only option open for the crew (in my opinion) was to evacuate the aircraft.
2. I am not a A330 operator but as it is a ETOPS a/c i can only imagine that the holds must have a minimum time period they have been certified to contain a fire with minimal risk to pax. (I'm sure someone will know this)
3. I would like to congratulate both the crew on board the VS and also the entire LGW team for their reaction and for the hard work done on a very abnormal day. From the VS crew to the controllers to the fire teams to the guys driving the buses to have a major incident like that evacuate a 330 and have the airport open in what seamed to be around the 2 hour mark is a very big achievement and a very big learning day. I know I took alot onboard just watching it.
1. The crew from what I could see and hear conducted themselves very well. As i could hear on the RT the decision to evacuate was not taken lightly. The situation was controlled but because the fire chief could not confirm the presence of smoke or the absence of it due to the jet efflux the only option open for the crew (in my opinion) was to evacuate the aircraft.
2. I am not a A330 operator but as it is a ETOPS a/c i can only imagine that the holds must have a minimum time period they have been certified to contain a fire with minimal risk to pax. (I'm sure someone will know this)
3. I would like to congratulate both the crew on board the VS and also the entire LGW team for their reaction and for the hard work done on a very abnormal day. From the VS crew to the controllers to the fire teams to the guys driving the buses to have a major incident like that evacuate a 330 and have the airport open in what seamed to be around the 2 hour mark is a very big achievement and a very big learning day. I know I took alot onboard just watching it.
Forgive me A&C I was being lazy, and went on a stint on this thread with nothing but useless info, and from what I can see, the only thing I am guilty of is being a bit rusty on distance between LGW-SAM and back around. I don't know exactly what altitude they'd be at around SAM, but with their weight and step climbs out of LGW I was ball parking it at around FL200-FL250. Again with that altitude, you'd need around 60-70 miles to get down, and now I think about it more, thats looks about right with their track miles from the picture of their flight path.
I wasn't meaning to give a tone as to them not doing a good job, my statements were meant to simply asking if a dump took place (didn't know these 330's couldn't dump) in any situation, would an evacuation normally follow suit? It's kind of why I posted in the first place, I'm sure the evacuation was required, but I couldn't imagine them dumping.
I wasn't meaning to give a tone as to them not doing a good job, my statements were meant to simply asking if a dump took place (didn't know these 330's couldn't dump) in any situation, would an evacuation normally follow suit? It's kind of why I posted in the first place, I'm sure the evacuation was required, but I couldn't imagine them dumping.
Previous posts have covered the ill-informed press coverage of this incident yesterday so I don't have anything to add on that subject. However I would like to say well done to the Virgin Atlantic flight and cabin crew. A difficult situation, skillfully handled by professional people.
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: LHR
Posts: 556
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
An Aft-Cargo Smoke ECAM south of the I-O-W without further signs of smoke/fire entering the cabin is a no brainer... turn round and Mayday back to LGW. An overweight landing brings it's own problems but those are not insurmountable and certainly do not add to the current level of peril.
An Aft-Cargo smoke warning is not an automatic evacuation. The evacuation itself will cause injury and maybe broken bones for a few so is not a decision to be taken lightly. The average VS passenger might even get a few friction burns if they buy all their wardrobe at JD Sports
Once on the ground fire crews scan the aircraft surface with IR equipment for hot-spots within. Therefore a latched fire warning or cargo-smoke warning without sign of smoke in the cabin and without supporting hot-spot reports from the fire crew outside is almost certainly false. Any source of smoke in closed hold that has already been drenched in BCF is not an immediate threat and passengers can be disembarked via steps when they are available. Naturally the fire crews continue to monitor and evacuation remains an option at all times. The offending hold will not be opened until all the pax are disembarked.
It appears the crew were not presented with any evidence of fire onboard other than a single AFT Cargo Smoke.... Indeed to form a conclusion of imminent peril based solely on that would be faulted. To throw the passengers down the chutes is rather premature given those circumstances.
A big chuck-up to the CC however who got all the pax off safely when ordered to do so
An Aft-Cargo smoke warning is not an automatic evacuation. The evacuation itself will cause injury and maybe broken bones for a few so is not a decision to be taken lightly. The average VS passenger might even get a few friction burns if they buy all their wardrobe at JD Sports
Once on the ground fire crews scan the aircraft surface with IR equipment for hot-spots within. Therefore a latched fire warning or cargo-smoke warning without sign of smoke in the cabin and without supporting hot-spot reports from the fire crew outside is almost certainly false. Any source of smoke in closed hold that has already been drenched in BCF is not an immediate threat and passengers can be disembarked via steps when they are available. Naturally the fire crews continue to monitor and evacuation remains an option at all times. The offending hold will not be opened until all the pax are disembarked.
It appears the crew were not presented with any evidence of fire onboard other than a single AFT Cargo Smoke.... Indeed to form a conclusion of imminent peril based solely on that would be faulted. To throw the passengers down the chutes is rather premature given those circumstances.
A big chuck-up to the CC however who got all the pax off safely when ordered to do so
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Durham
Age: 62
Posts: 187
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fifteen people needed hospital treatment after the evacuation, 14 of them for suspected fractures.
Suspected is the operative word. A displaced or compound fracture would have been instantly apparent. AFAIK there were no compound fractures reported. Suspected fracture? Yes of course. Anywhere which has the simplest of x-ray facilities would be able to determine if a fracture has occurred. Triage would identify the potential for a fracture and direct the casualty to the appropriate place. Tooting would have been well able to deal with that. London Ambulance did triage and effectively so.
Suspected is the operative word. A displaced or compound fracture would have been instantly apparent. AFAIK there were no compound fractures reported. Suspected fracture? Yes of course. Anywhere which has the simplest of x-ray facilities would be able to determine if a fracture has occurred. Triage would identify the potential for a fracture and direct the casualty to the appropriate place. Tooting would have been well able to deal with that. London Ambulance did triage and effectively so.
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Twickenham
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just came upon this thread and was interested by some of the input. From a 744 point of view, and the A330 may be different in detail but not the philosophy, could we agree:
Assuming an "Aft Cargo Fire Warning" at approx 25000ft the Emergency Checklist would require firing at least one bottle into the aft hold, the second being discharged just before touchdown.
Once again apologies for not being type specific but the 744 cargo hold fire detector is in fact a device that measures the visibility between two lenses to detect smoke (no smoke without fire is the theory). This has proved to be slightly unreliable when carrying fruit from a hot climate which has caused misting when the cargo temperature cooled in flight, clearly not an issue here.
Firing the bottle actually creates a mist and the fire detector will now continue to indicate a fire as the visibility has now been severely reduced by the discharge.
Only indication now as to whether you actually have a fire in the hold is the temperature in the hold and you can bet that all eyes were on that gauge and cabin crew were feeling the floor temp of the aft cabin.
25000ft/ 75-80 track miles to touchdown without speedbrake so LGW is perfect, lets forget about other suitable airports.
Touchdown at LGW and Captain orders an emergency evacuation, slides deployed and he would expect the Cabin Crew to do the evacuation to the max, there really are no half measures, either an orderly rapid disembarkation down the steps or an emergency evacuation down the slides.
Congratulations to all for getting the ship home, it really is more complex when you are in that situation.
Assuming an "Aft Cargo Fire Warning" at approx 25000ft the Emergency Checklist would require firing at least one bottle into the aft hold, the second being discharged just before touchdown.
Once again apologies for not being type specific but the 744 cargo hold fire detector is in fact a device that measures the visibility between two lenses to detect smoke (no smoke without fire is the theory). This has proved to be slightly unreliable when carrying fruit from a hot climate which has caused misting when the cargo temperature cooled in flight, clearly not an issue here.
Firing the bottle actually creates a mist and the fire detector will now continue to indicate a fire as the visibility has now been severely reduced by the discharge.
Only indication now as to whether you actually have a fire in the hold is the temperature in the hold and you can bet that all eyes were on that gauge and cabin crew were feeling the floor temp of the aft cabin.
25000ft/ 75-80 track miles to touchdown without speedbrake so LGW is perfect, lets forget about other suitable airports.
Touchdown at LGW and Captain orders an emergency evacuation, slides deployed and he would expect the Cabin Crew to do the evacuation to the max, there really are no half measures, either an orderly rapid disembarkation down the steps or an emergency evacuation down the slides.
Congratulations to all for getting the ship home, it really is more complex when you are in that situation.
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Sussex UK
Posts: 369
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A rumour heard from an Easyjet CC that there was no fire. Some idiot had loaded dry ice and the 'smoke' triggered the hold alarms. Anybody know if this is true or urban legend. Presumably the fire crews know if there really was a hold fire or not by now?
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: SE Asia
Posts: 141
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dry Ice
Packed properly and in limited quantities dry ice is allowed in the holds of aircraft under DGR. So some idiot may or may not apply depending on how and of course if it was loaded. Not sure that Easyjet CC would be a more reliable source than the AAIB
But that apparently is the current scuttlebutt round LGW.
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: SE Asia
Posts: 141
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is however possible I believe for dry ice to activate the alarms. If so would be interesting to know if correct loading procedures were followed. Take many years of a loader's salary to recover those costs!! All supposing it was dry ice AND an error.
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: sussex
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
At this particular incident the slides were manned at the bottom by afs rescue crews. while the idea of passengers helping sounds good, in reality the speed and number of passengers coming down made this a very difficult situation to control even for experienced rescue crews. An improvement would be to have a tapered run off at the end of the slide so that the passenger does not hit the floor at speed , which in some cases is what happened at lgw
scooby,
There is a deceleration strip for the last couple of metres to slow evacuees.
To use a slide you exit at a brisk walking pace and jump and sit on the slide - it's nice and soft. Do NOT stop and gently lower yourself to the edge of the floor - if you do that the cabin crew will push you out.
You will be decelerated to a very moderate running pace before you hit the ground (running).
There is a deceleration strip for the last couple of metres to slow evacuees.
To use a slide you exit at a brisk walking pace and jump and sit on the slide - it's nice and soft. Do NOT stop and gently lower yourself to the edge of the floor - if you do that the cabin crew will push you out.
You will be decelerated to a very moderate running pace before you hit the ground (running).
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 254
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This was on the news and the crew did a great job. Why has this thread been moved to spectators gallery?
Last edited by Kingfisher; 19th Apr 2012 at 06:39. Reason: spelling