Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Qantas mid-air decompression

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

  • #31
    Originally posted by AJ
    AVION1, just so you know not one post you have made has been accurate.

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by AJ
      AVION1, just so you know not one post you have made has been accurate.
      AJ.. You ARE the man....
      Bite me Airways.....

      Comment


      • #33
        Of course the media was comparing the incident to United 811 and Pan Am 103 saying it was just as bad.
        sigpic
        http://www.jetphotos.net/showphotos.php?userid=170

        Comment


        • #34
          UA881, anyone?



          Ironically, it was a 747 as well, albeit a -100.

          Fly from Buffalo!

          Non-Stop flights to:

          JFK, LGA, BOS, PIT, PHL, IAD, DCA, BWI, CLT, PHX, LAS, EWR, ATL, CVG, DTW, MSP, ORD, MDW, MCO, TPA, BDL, ALB, DFW, CLE, FLL, RSW, ROC

          Comment


          • #35
            Don, a QF LAME lives 3 houses away from me, he said this aircraft was known as the "sardine can"...a couple of years ago went for a retrofit at Avalon and the amount of corrosion and water damage they found was astonishing. There were rumours it was not worth doing it up.

            This is the 4th 747-400 Qantas has had problems with corrosion or water ingestion with that have made light of the media, apparently there are others which never saw light of day, also in their 767 fleet.

            Looking at a close up of the photo, would you say the bottom of the detached fairing had the bonding glue "washed away" over time? I doubt we are looking at an explosion here, there is no explosive damage to the bags in the compartment.

            Passengers have manifested the floor immediately above the hole actually buckled and "sank" alarmingly.

            The way I see it, the fairing detached, cleanly at the bottom but tore away part of the top skin of the area, andn in the process ripped the attached aluminium skin separating the area from the cargo hold.

            Comment


            • #36
              In case You haven't seen it

              There's a video of the incident from the inside of the plane. Here is the link
              Auf YouTube findest du die angesagtesten Videos und Tracks. Außerdem kannst du eigene Inhalte hochladen und mit Freunden oder gleich der ganzen Welt teilen.
              La Roche Spotters

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by Crunk415balla
                It doesn't look like the "hole" itself is that big.
                If the stringer spacing is 8 inches and the frames spacing is 20 inch, both being industry standards, the miminum hole size is 64 inches high and 40 inches wide. That works out to 2560 square inches, which is BIG.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by AJ
                  AVION1, just so you know not one post you have made has been accurate.
                  After working for FEDEX and DHL for 22 years as A&P mechanic, I can tell you those bags are mail bags from those companies, I can even see a COMAT bag in there (company's materials).
                  If you don't believe me, that is fine. Have a great day and this is my last post to your forum..and my last visit to it.
                  A Former Airdisaster.Com Forum (senior member)....

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by WOSR
                    Don, a QF LAME lives 3 houses away from me, he said this aircraft was known as the "sardine can"...a couple of years ago went for a retrofit at Avalon and the amount of corrosion and water damage they found was astonishing. There were rumours it was not worth doing it up.
                    First hand information is always the best source.
                    Corrosion control is always a challenge for all of us. However I have seen corrosion end an aircraft's life but to end a 744's life the corrosion repair bill would need to total >10 million dollars. I have seen corrosion only repairs on a 742F total >1 million. None the less I'll be looking for the official cause of the event.
                    This is the 4th 747-400 Qantas has had problems with corrosion or water ingestion with that have made light of the media, apparently there are others which never saw light of day, also in their 767 fleet.
                    Such is always the case. I have seen totally clean (corrosion free) "C" checks but only on the first "C" check out of the factory.
                    Looking at a close up of the photo, would you say the bottom of the detached fairing had the bonding glue "washed away" over time? I doubt we are looking at an explosion here, there is no explosive damage to the bags in the compartment.
                    There is no "bonding glue" securing the fairing to the fuselage. However there is a "aerodynamic seal" which is applied as a fillet seal (applied around the edge) applied after the fairing is installed.
                    I too have doubts about a planned explosion but other things could have contributed to the events cause. Time will tell.
                    Passengers have manifested the floor immediately above the hole actually buckled and "sank" alarmingly.
                    I saw the same report but it was reported bulging up, then down which (if true) supports the case for a pressure surge in the lower lobe. Again, time will tell.
                    The way I see it, the fairing detached, cleanly at the bottom but tore away part of the top skin of the area, andn in the process ripped the attached aluminium skin separating the area from the cargo hold.
                    The detaching fairing was not a cause of the event. The fairing only attaches to the skin around the edges. All edges are visible in the photo and none of the damage is common to the fairing attach points. The bulkhead mounting the section still attached. For this bulkhead to have pulled the skin loose, the aft fairing would be damaged.
                    Last edited by Dmmoore; 2008-07-26, 16:39.
                    Don
                    Standard practice for managers around the world:
                    Ready - Fire - Aim! DAMN! Missed again!

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Meh...defer/cdl it and continue to the destination

                      Kidding of course.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        How about this idea for a chain of events:

                        Something from inside the cargo compartment caused damage to the aircraft skin from the inside, such as a cargo pallet that shifted. Could have been on this flight or could have been damage from an earlier event. Any damage would not have been visible from the outside as this area of the airplane skin is covered by the fairing.

                        If the damage was enough to cause a split in the aluminum skin, then theoretically Boeing's flap should have opened and limited the damage to one small square. Even if it was limited to one square, there would most likely be enough outrushing air from the decompression to have blown off the outer fairing.

                        Why was there more than one square of damage? Maybe some cargo item blocked the outrushing air and created a pressure spike (like has been considered for the Aloha 243 convertible accident).

                        Maybe corrosion also played a part in either making the damage site larger, or creating a weak structure that failed possibly with little or no damage from the cargo.

                        Interesting event.

                        pothole
                        You just can't avoid the potholes.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by pothole
                          How about this idea for a chain of events:

                          Something from inside the cargo compartment caused damage to the aircraft skin from the inside, such as a cargo pallet that shifted. Could have been on this flight or could have been damage from an earlier event. Any damage would not have been visible from the outside as this area of the airplane skin is covered by the fairing.
                          Possible however the damage would be visible from inside the lower lobe. Pallets are not close to the skin in this area. Roughly 12 - 14 inches between the vertical stantions and the skin / structure.
                          If the damage was enough to cause a split in the aluminum skin, then theoretically Boeing's flap should have opened and limited the damage to one small square. Even if it was limited to one square, there would most likely be enough outrushing air from the decompression to have blown off the outer fairing.
                          I missed something. Beings flap? What flap? There is no "Flap" in the fuselage design. The limiting factor is anti tear strips that prevent structural damage from destroying the aircraft (ah la De Haviland Comet).
                          Why was there more than one square of damage? Maybe some cargo item blocked the outrushing air and created a pressure spike (like has been considered for the Aloha 243 convertible accident).

                          Maybe corrosion also played a part in either making the damage site larger, or creating a weak structure that failed possibly with little or no damage from the cargo.

                          Interesting event.

                          pothole
                          Corrosion is always a possibility. Corrosion tends to occur in places where water / moisture can collect and stagnate. The area that's damaged is not in an area where I would expect to find it. That does not mean corrosion couldn't be an issue.
                          Don
                          Standard practice for managers around the world:
                          Ready - Fire - Aim! DAMN! Missed again!

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            As expected CASA has issued a directive that the oxygen bottles on all Australian registered (read Qantas) Boeing 747-400s be inspected.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Robin Guess Aviation Historian, Photographer, Web Designer.

                              http://www.Jet-Fighters.Net
                              http://www.Jet-Liners.Net

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Standard 115 cu/ft composite O2 bottle comes with:

                                -Direct reading pressure gauge
                                -Manual shutoff valve
                                -Frangible disk set to blow off excess bottle pressure at 2500-2700 psi.


                                Nominal oxygen bottle pressure is 1850 psi for a fresh tank. If given the chance, the frangible disk should have relieved excess bottle pressure to prevent such an explosion if this is truly what had happened. It will be interesting to hear about the dynamic for this event. Rare!


                                I am not sure if this 744 had reached its max normal cabin delta P given the altitude the event occurred at, but with this sudden rush of pressure from an O2 bottle, it may have momentarily opened the cabin overpressure relief valves. Any pictures of the overpressure relief valve flappers to see weather they are still ajar? That might be a good tell-tale.

                                With all that O2 flooding the compartment, it might be just as well it punched a hole in the fuselage to get it all out, nothing like an oxygen fire to make your day.

                                In my humble opinion.


                                N1

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X