AF66 CDG-LAX diverts - uncontained engine failure over Atlantic

[SStreeter]

Originally Posted by WingSlinger

Maybe Airbus and airlines operating the A380 should chip in a few $ and equip a few of these remote Canadian airports with airstairs capable of handling it.

I've seen mention recently (upthread or elseforum) of the fact that the doors on the lower deck of the A380 are no higher than other (large) aircraft.

The point is that there was no point in allowing the pax off: where were they going to go? An ill-equipped (for that number) terminal building? Onboard they were warm, dry, fed and watered (&c.).

[rog747]

Originally Posted by OldLurker

AvHerald says the accident aircraft landed at 15:41Z; passengers were kept on board of the aircraft until arrival of the replacement aircraft because the airport does not have stairs to accomodate the A380; AF's 777 arrived to pick them up at 05:50Z and departed at 09:55Z (and a 737 for the rest of the pax somewhat later).
Incident: France A388 over Greenland on Sep 30th 2017, fan and engine inlet separated
If that's accurate, pax were on board the A380 at Goose for between 14 and 18 hours. No explanation of how they got off the A380 if the airport doesn't have stairs for it; I suppose the airport improvised something. Anyway, as others commented up-thread, (a) the airport probably couldn't accommodate over 500 pax and crew; (b) if they'd got off, rules (aka bureaucracy) might have required them to be processed by Canada immigration, which would have taken forever.

I haven't seen any complaints from pax, so I guess they were kept comfortable enough, and if they'd seen the engine, glad to be on the ground.

I suppose the airport was able to provide ground power and/or refuel the APU - or would there have been enough fuel on board to run the APU for that long? And ... I wonder if the airport was able to provide food and water .. and if they were able to clean the toilets during the wait ...

the pax reported the local army/air forces base fed them - grub was sent on board

[WHBM]

The account of no compatible steps or access does seem to be a nonsense - what happens if you divert there with a medical emergency ? Sling the patient down the slides ?

[Sailvi767]

Originally Posted by OldLurker

Question: after a diversion to a remote field without facilities, such as this one, or the Swiss 777 at Iqaluit earlier this year, what happens to hold baggage? Is it always transferred to the aircraft that evacuates the pax, or does it sometimes wait until the airline flies in baggage-shifting equipment, or even until the failed aircraft is repaired and flown out? If the latter, that's quite an incentive to carry on as much as you can ...

The odds of this ever happening to a passenger are so low that if it's really a concern they should be looking up all the time to dodge any incoming meteors!

[Swedishflyingkiwi]

How did they get off he A380 then?

If there were no stairs for the A380, one can wonder how they transferred to the 777's ? Walk across the wings?

[India Four Two]

Stairs were not the issue
https://twitter.com/DanMcneely/statu...460224/photo/1

[G-CPTN]

Originally Posted by Swedishflyingkiwi

If there were no stairs for the A380, one can wonder how they transferred to the 777's ? Walk across the wings?

I would expect they are referring to the multiple-level boarding bridges:-

[number0009]

Originally Posted by WHBM

The account of no compatible steps or access does seem to be a nonsense -

I do believe it was nonsense. Saw a photo of passengers deplaning stairs to board recovery aircraft once they arrived. Apologize but was unable to find the photo to include while searching today.

Video found.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_c...&v=aOtvuA6iKBg

[underfire]

Logistically, much easier to keep them on the plane. Deplaning would cause far more issues than it solves. The lower doors are virtually the same as most other commercial aircraft, so there are stair options, just not efficient ones. As shown, one set of stairs to offload...
Half of the A380 flights I have taken into Dubai deplane using stairs. It just takes a looooong time.

I am certain Customs is also a consideration.

[WingNut60]

Just for info:

As of now F-HPJE appears to be still sitting at Goose Bay, as you might expect.

[WHBM]

Originally Posted by underfire

Logistically, much easier to keep them on the plane.

I'm sure it was, for the airport authorities. Aircraft toilets filled up and went inoperable ? Tough, not our problem. Pax stuck in the Y seats for 24 hours, some with lap infants ? Tough, not our problem. No immigration facilities ? Yeah, right, aircraft chock-full of illegal immigrants who were inadmissible to Canada (despite all being TSA checked before departure for a US arrival) and who were obviously going to spirit off with their accomplices waiting outside Goose Bay terminal across the Canadian tundra, spreading mayhem as they went ...

[galaxy flyer]

It is GOOSE BAY, they CANNOT leave the airport except by plane—where’s the immigration issue, just keep them corralled in one of the military housing units.

[CONSO]

Originally Posted by galaxy flyer

It is GOOSE BAY, they CANNOT leave the airport except by plane—where’s the immigration issue, just keep them corralled in one of the military housing units.

WELL yes they could leave- but its a long walk to other civilization over non existant trails,long desolate roads, and maybe not to friendly fauna known as bears...

[Capn Bloggs]

Precisely, WHBM.

[wiggy]

If that's accurate, pax were on board the A380 at Goose for between 14 and 18 hours

So trying to get all this supposedly horrid time on board this into context...... On the aircraft for perhaps 20 hours, plus or minus, timed from boarding at CDG. Certainly not ideal but it's possibly no more time spent in the cabin than some endure on some of the more extreme ULH services. It's less time than some pax used to spend on board in the days of flights coming through to Europe from Aus when they didn't have to leave the aircraft during the transit in the likes of BKK or SIN. I've personally seen 20 hours plus on board for pax and crew post a ULH diversion (for info that was because immigration weren't happy with the unexpected arrival, and for those who know their human rights it was a place where playing that card doesn't work.....so we were stuck.....for a long time.)

I'd agree keeping passengers on board is far from ideal for everybody....I'll bet the AF crew wanted to get the pax off and get some horizontal rest as well, but honestly with the best will in the world sometimes s*** happens, even of a low grade variety, even when everybody is trying as hard as they can to produce the best outcome for the very body. There are things you simply can't plan for, but sometimes the best you can do is make sure passengers and crew are kept safe, warm, fed and watered......what happened on this flight doesn't sound ideal but it doesn't sound like cruel and unusual punishment either.

[Volume]

As of now F-HPJE appears to be still sitting at Goose Bay, as you might expect.

Are there procedures in place to prepare an aircraft for long term parking in the arctic? This for sure would require to drain any water/waste line and probably prevent some more freezing of collected fluids. I know how a glider looks after left one winter outside in Sibiria with some of the drainholes permanently frozen but some other areas subjected to freeze-thaw-cycles...

[joojoo]

Originally Posted by wiggy

So trying to get all this supposedly horrid time on board this into context...... On the aircraft for perhaps 20 hours, plus or minus, timed from boarding at CDG.

'Plus' rather than 'minus' I would think.
Did the rescue 777 take them to LAX? How many hours is that? It all seems rather gruelling to me and I don't envy them at all.

[wiggy]

Originally Posted by joojoo

'Plus' rather than 'minus' I would think.
Did the rescue 777 take them to LAX? How many hours is that? It all seems rather gruelling to me and I don't envy them at all.

Gruelling, yes, I'd agree, but at the moment there are too many unknowns to simply assume that getting off the aircraft was a better option and TBF staying on board was probably more of a "known"....in all honesty I doubt we will ever know what would have worked best but one example people are talking about why wasn't military accommodation used e.g. barrack blocks ........

Well having enjoyed the military lifestyle a while back I'd be a bit wary off sending folks off to some (unknown to me) barrack blocks on the assumption that it must be better..Unoccupied or not? if unoccupied was the water off for the winter? bedding? entertainment? ....Having enjoyed time in barrack blocks and time on the aircraft over the years given the choice I'd stay on board thank you......

I can accept keeping by the passengers onboard was gruelling and would be hard work for the crew....but given what we actually know I'd still be prepared to accept it could have been the best option for the passengers...

[joojoo]

Any change of air and environment for a couple of hours would have worked wonders for me in this position. even being able to lie down on a wooden floor in a heated shed would have been preferable to 20 hours in an economy seat, then boarding another trans-continental flight. I'm literally horrified for the families with children.

But, there are security and safety concerns I know. I just hope the people making the decisions in this situation were as imaginative as possible.

[Musician]

It has been reported that a group of people were let off the plane for a smoke break. I expect that they used the extra room gained when the first relief plane departed, the upper deck must've been free then. It's not that bad when you're not belted in, not hungry or thirsty, and you can get up for a few steps or a stretch from time to time. Putting something good on the TV probably goes a long way, too. ;-)