Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Smokin' in the boys' room (the headlines never stop giving)

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Smokin' in the boys' room (the headlines never stop giving)

    China investigates why plane dropped more than 6,000m !!!!!

    (Chinese authorities investigate why an Air China 737 crew initiated a non-spectacular controlled 2000fpm descent due to cabin pressurization problems)

    Apparently the crew accidentally switched off both bleed air valves. They got a cabin altitude warning and initiated the descent while working the problem. The pax masks were deployed but there was no rapid decompression. At around 13,000ft they discovered the error, repressurized the cabin and ascended back to cruise altitude and continued to destination.

    Yawn.

    Not that this isn't an egregious error, and apparently it was caused by the crew smoking in the cockpit and then attempting to ventilate the smoke. (How common is this?)

    My guess is that they intended to switch the packs to high flow, but hit the wrong switches and switched off the pack valves. If you look at the overhead panel, it's not so hard to see how this mistake could be made, assuming you are not really looking at the panel and depending upon what you are smoking...

    Culture.

  • #2
    Originally posted by Evan View Post
    China investigates why plane dropped more than 6,000m !!!!!

    (Chinese authorities investigate why an Air China 737 crew initiated a non-spectacular controlled 2000fpm descent due to cabin pressurization problems)

    Apparently the crew accidentally switched off both bleed air valves. They got a cabin altitude warning and initiated the descent while working the problem. The pax masks were deployed but there was no rapid decompression. At around 13,000ft they discovered the error, repressurized the cabin and ascended back to cruise altitude and continued to destination.

    Yawn.

    Not that this isn't an egregious error, and apparently it was caused by the crew smoking in the cockpit and then attempting to ventilate the smoke. (How common is this?)

    My guess is that they intended to switch the packs to high flow, but hit the wrong switches and switched off the pack valves. If you look at the overhead panel, it's not so hard to see how this mistake could be made, assuming you are not really looking at the panel and depending upon what you are smoking...

    Culture.
    I saw this on the web this morning. Something does not smell right to me, and I don't mean the cigarette smoke. In the old days 3 of us would be smoking at once. Deadheading around the globe I have smelled it coming from the cockpit many times on foreign carriers. Even had a Turkish Captain invite me up front to burn one with the crew once.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by BoeingBobby View Post
      I saw this on the web this morning. Something does not smell right to me, and I don't mean the cigarette smoke. In the old days 3 of us would be smoking at once. Deadheading around the globe I have smelled it coming from the cockpit many times on foreign carriers. Even had a Turkish Captain invite me up front to burn one with the crew once.
      Yes, but now it's not the good ole' days and smoking is forbidden, if you do it you might me tempted to set all pacs at max to have a good ventilation and avoid that someone else notices and maybe reports it. As you very well said, you smelled it coming from the cockpit. I am sure that a crew that is willing to violate the no-smoke rule is also willing to try to hide that. Do you know why?

      The airline reported both pilots were placed under investigation for suspicions of having been smoking on the flight deck which ultimately resulted in the cabin pressure problem and emergency descent. The airline will exercise zero tolerance should the crew be found guilty of such wrong doing.
      Because you know what WILL happen if you are reported.

      By the way, again the airline istelf reported:

      The airline alleges that while smoking in the cockpit the crew mistakenly shut down both bleed air supplies causing the cabin to lose pressure. Believing the cabin pressure could not be controlled the crew thus initiated an emergency descent. After leveling off at safe altitude high temperatures in the cabin, as result of air just being recirculated, prompted the crew to further checks, the crew found both bleed air systems switched off, reactivated both bleed air systems which caused the cabin to pressurize again, the crew climbed the aircraft to 7500 meters and continued to Dalian.
      If you have the airline itself reporting all this (when the tendency is to say something like "the flight crew performed a controlled oral plant oxidation and subsequently followed related procedures that involved descending"), it is very likely that there is some truth in this.

      http://avherald.com/h?article=4bb06499&opt=0

      --- Judge what is said by the merits of what is said, not by the credentials of who said it. ---
      --- Defend what you say with arguments, not by imposing your credentials ---

      Comment


      • #4
        BB, did you see the PM?

        --- Judge what is said by the merits of what is said, not by the credentials of who said it. ---
        --- Defend what you say with arguments, not by imposing your credentials ---

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by BoeingBobby View Post
          I saw this on the web this morning. Something does not smell right to me, and I don't mean the cigarette smoke.
          Go on...

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Gabriel View Post
            BB, did you see the PM?
            Si, keep me posted. Sorry to say no other guests allowed though. I would have liked to meet ATL. Although we can all still do lunch.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Evan View Post
              Go on...
              Just hard to believe that they would have accidentally turned off both packs. There is a smoke evacuation hatch in the 74's all the way through the 400. I have no idea what is in the 73. If you just crack the handle just a little bit, you can have a few puffs and it will get sucked right out. In the "old" days again, guys would let whole rolls of toilet paper run out. In the 707, the mechanics had a fit because guys would throw their old flashlight batteries out and it damaged the leading edge of the vertical stab. It was originally the sextant port on the 707 and early 74's.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by BoeingBobby View Post
                Just hard to believe that they would have accidentally turned off both packs. There is a smoke evacuation hatch in the 74's all the way through the 400. I have no idea what is in the 73. If you just crack the handle just a little bit, you can have a few puffs and it will get sucked right out. In the "old" days again, guys would let whole rolls of toilet paper run out. In the 707, the mechanics had a fit because guys would throw their old flashlight batteries out and it damaged the leading edge of the vertical stab. It was originally the sextant port on the 707 and early 74's.
                Those are the stories we need you for.

                If you look at the bleed air controls on the 737NG overhead, there are two switches for the packs (the ones they might have been going for) and two switches for the bleed air valves (the ones they might have gone to instead) that are arranged in line. Sure, it's a bonehead move, but again, I think this also depends upon WHAT they were smoking....
                Attached Files

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Evan View Post
                  WHAT they were smoking....

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Evan View Post
                    .......Culture.......
                    There’s more culture in a pot of yogurt !
                    If it 'ain't broken........ Don't try to mend it !

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by BoeingBobby View Post
                      Just hard to believe that they would have accidentally turned off both packs. There is a smoke evacuation hatch in the 74's all the way through the 400......In the "old" days...
                      [Somewhat blue font]This is actually consistent with Evan's theories. Bobby might be wrong that they would know the proper procedures for smoking in the cockpit- since that is officially verboten. One might speculate that they had never been trained nor mentored on those procedures that Bobby knows well.

                      Thus they resorted to cowboy improvisation, and then the Swiss cheese of flipping the near-but-wrong switch.

                      We must return a brief "how to smoke" session to the recurrent simulator sessions and perhaps this even ranks adding to memory checklists, or at least the QRH.
                      Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Vaping,,, it's worse than I thought. Loss of cabin pressure AND loss of dignity. CNN reporting that the F/O had "switched off a fan" without telling the captain.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by 3WE View Post
                          [Somewhat blue font]We must return a brief "how to smoke" session to the recurrent simulator sessions and perhaps this even ranks adding to memory checklists, or at least the QRH. However, before we do that, we must review procedures to see if they are adequate to support vaping and then add "vaping" to the language in the various FCOMQRHPOH documentation...
                          Fixed.
                          Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Evan View Post
                            [...]
                            Not that this isn't an egregious error, and apparently it was caused by the crew smoking in the cockpit and then attempting to ventilate the smoke. (How common is this?)

                            My guess is that they intended to switch the packs to high flow, but hit the wrong switches and switched off the pack valves. If you look at the overhead panel, it's not so hard to see how this mistake could be made, assuming you are not really looking at the panel and depending upon what you are smoking...

                            Culture.
                            How common is this. I have a better question. How common is this since not a single passenger in Europe (I am cautious, I don't know everything about worldwide aviation) is allowed to smoke inflight?

                            I have one answer. I don't smoke, not since the beginning of the year 1978.. But what if you sometimes have to? A very good question. As far as I know, Lufthansa does not ask you if you smoke before they hire you. At least I've not read something like that, again not since 1978.

                            If you are addicted to the smoke, you must (it definitely is a must) find out how long you can live without smoke. Not even during the maximum range of a Boeing 737?!

                            This is one reason why I am NOT a military nonsmoker, although I don't smoke since more than 40 years. Pubs die when the smokers stay at home.

                            PS: I just wonder what smoke addicted Lufthansa pilots did when it was allowed to smoke also in the passenger cabin. Since I am here, I know the ceiling of the LH-B744. Even one day after the inauguration flight of the LH-B744 (1989) nobody was and is able to open the window aboard, at alt 28,000 (or higher...).

                            So, this seems to be a question which is at least as old as the Boeing 747 (1969). What is or has been the solution for smoke addicted pilots? Not necessarily a descent of more than ... 18,000 (?!), if you ask me.
                            The German long haul is alive, since more than 60 years.
                            The Gold Member in the 747 club, 50 years since the first LH 747.
                            And constantly advanced, 744 and 748 /w upper and lower EICAS.
                            This is Lohausen International airport speaking, echo delta delta lima.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Yesterday or only 24 or 36 hours ago, on German TV there again showed the documentary about AF #447. Back then in 2009, nobody asked if one of the 2 rather unexperienced pilots (!) were smokers. I can definitely say that, I was here in this forum during the AF #447 discussion.

                              What again with the AF #447 documentary seems to be important, not "Do you smoke or don't you smoke", but "How many flight hours do you own,
                              a) on jet a/c
                              b) on longhaul jet a/c
                              c) on precisely this longhaul jet a/c, on precisely this route: Rio de Janeiro to Charles de Gaulle on an AF-A332?

                              And after the discussion here in the year 2009, I got frightened again during this documentary. Flight Captain Marc Dubois, with his 11,000 flight hours, was tired and so he left the cockpit to sleep for 1 or 2 hours. This is normal. But what happened when Captain Dubois left the cockpit is a catastrophy in my eyes.

                              a/c: Air France Airbus 330-200. If you ask me, this type does not have to be treated differently, compared to a LH-B744. Not concerning maximum range, not concerning pax number aboard, never.

                              So. Why on Earth was it possible for Captain Dubois to leave the cockpit with his 11,000 flight hours, and his replacement was not again a captain with more than 10,000 flight hours?!

                              ?!

                              I know intercontinental flights with at least three pilots aboard, where at least two, if not three Flight Captains (four stripes) are on board.

                              Captain Dubois was waked after F/O Robert was no longer able to correct F/O Bonin s mistake: Bonin began to pull the yoke without the knowledge (?!?!)
                              that pulling the yoke makes you slower and slower and slower, until stall and yet slower.

                              The only Flight Captain on board, Dubois, ordered Bonin not to pull. But it was to late. Dubois, Robert and Bonin died, and with them 225 humans on board.

                              Only 1 Flight Captain on board one of the longest longhaul flights which the airlines provides?

                              I think this question is more important on intercontinental flights. Smoker or non smoker? Even if Bonin were a smoker, imho he was not able to make more mistakes during AF #447!

                              Greg Feith is a pilot and a (former) senior member of the NTSB. I'd guess he seconds what I've just written. Smoker or non-smoker, in the cockpit of not only intercontinental flights, you need 1 man with experience. Which was not the case after Dubois left the A332 cockpit.

                              Man, documentaries. You begin to remember things if it were yesterday...
                              The German long haul is alive, since more than 60 years.
                              The Gold Member in the 747 club, 50 years since the first LH 747.
                              And constantly advanced, 744 and 748 /w upper and lower EICAS.
                              This is Lohausen International airport speaking, echo delta delta lima.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X