Jetstar A330-200 emergency landing in Guam

[James Bond]

Just heard this on New Zealand radio, a Jetstar A330-200 from KIX to OOL had to divert to Guam - fire, smoke in the cockpit.

190 px, 13 crew. All safe.

Registration VH-EBD
Serial number 513
Type 330-201
First flight date 07/02/2003
Test registration F-WWYV
21/04/2003 Qantas VH-EBD
01/11/2006 Jetstar VH-EBD

http://www.jetphotos.net/showphotos.php?regsearch=VH-EBD&view=true

[Rusty]

Jetstar chief executive officer Bruce Buchanan said a computer error message identified a fault with a heating element in a cockpit window that caused a small fire.

The cockpit crew donned oxygen masks and extinguished the fire, while the pilot made a mayday call and diverted the aircraft to Guam.


The Australian Transport Safety Bureau and the United States-based National Transportation Safety Board were investigating the incident, as was Qantas because of its responsibility for maintaining the plane, Mr Buchanan said.
"It's too early to speculate ... all we know is we got a computer-generated message [about] a fault in the heating element of the (cockpit) window and then the smoke in the cockpit and a small flame in the bottom corner of the window and the pilots reacted very quickly and in a professional manner,'' Mr Buchanan said

[IntheShade]

Crap--here we go again.

[Dantheman]

Anyone have any further information about the computer generated message? Such as how soon was it transmitted? etc.

[Gabriel]

From breakingtweets.com, this now makes four emergency landings in the last 24 hours:

The last 24 hours have been eventful in the skies with four planes forced to emergency land before reaching their destination on Wednesday - one in Asia, two in Europe, and one in North America. Here’s a roundup of the incidents:

An Airbus 330-220 plane bound from Japan to Australia landed in Guam at 11 p.m. local time after a fire broke out in the cockpit. There were 203 passengers on board.

An Airbus 320 flight bound from the Canary Islands to Oslo, Norway was forced back to its place of departure and landed safely at 8:05 a.m. local time after an engine failure. There were 189 passengers on board.

An Airbus 340-300 jet bound from Milan to Beijing landed in Moscow at 9:07 p.m. local time also after an engine failure. There were 155 passengers on board.

An American Airlines flight bound from New York to Zurich landed in Nova Scotia at 7:40 p.m. local time after a fire ignited in a bathroom. There were 210 passengers on board.

The incidents occurred just days after an Air France flight from Rio de Janeiro to Paris disappeared from radar screens and crashed in the Atlantic Ocean.

Somehow I imagine that 4 emergencies of this sort worldwide is about a normal daily average.

Only that now a sneeze in a plane makes its way to the news.

[Dantheman]

But a fire in the bathroom is unheard of.

On a much more serious and somber note, another plane crash will occur sooner or later. It is a sad fact about air travel.

Somehow I imagine that 4 emergencies of this sort worldwide is about a normal daily average.

Only that now a sneeze in a plane makes its way to the news.

[Theoddkiwi]

Sounds like the heating elements shorted out. Not uncommon, i have seen some real doozies of arched out window heat elements and terminals.

I once found a small block of cheese in the sill of the cockpit sliding window. The Window heat CB kept popping. It was frozen and had condesation all over it. Could not prove this was what was causing it, but...

The crews have a BAD habit of using the sill as a place to put stuff such as their lunch. I wrote a repot to our safety dept, who have since instructed the pilots to not use the sill as a bench.

[ptbodale]

But a fire in the bathroom is unheard of.

Air Canada flight 797, DFW to YYZ, (DC-9-32) on June 3, 1983 had a fire in the rear lav and it made an emergency landing at Cincinnati. Twenty-three passengers died.

[paulomario77]

Interesting, 3 of the 4 incidents involved an Airbus (whoever wrote the article was eager to point that out), but it wasn't mentioned that the AA flight was a Boeing 767-300.

From breakingtweets.com, this now makes four emergency landings in the last 24 hours:

The last 24 hours have been eventful in the skies with four planes forced to emergency land before reaching their destination on Wednesday - one in Asia, two in Europe, and one in North America. Here’s a roundup of the incidents:

An Airbus 330-220 plane bound from Japan to Australia landed in Guam at 11 p.m. local time after a fire broke out in the cockpit. There were 203 passengers on board.

An Airbus 320 flight bound from the Canary Islands to Oslo, Norway was forced back to its place of departure and landed safely at 8:05 a.m. local time after an engine failure. There were 189 passengers on board.

An Airbus 340-300 jet bound from Milan to Beijing landed in Moscow at 9:07 p.m. local time also after an engine failure. There were 155 passengers on board.

An American Airlines flight bound from New York to Zurich landed in Nova Scotia at 7:40 p.m. local time after a fire ignited in a bathroom. There were 210 passengers on board.

The incidents occurred just days after an Air France flight from Rio de Janeiro to Paris disappeared from radar screens and crashed in the Atlantic Ocean.

[ATFS_Crash]

But a fire in the bathroom is unheard of.

False. From what I understand the lavatory is a rather commonplace (relatively) for fires to occur.

There is some unique equipment and conditions such as with the electrical equipment used to operate the plumbing that can be a source of fire. It's also one of the few places that terrorists (mentally ill or disgruntled people) or smokers can have privacy to start trouble. Fortunately smoke alarms and severe consequences has helped deter a lot of smokers from putting people's lives at risk just so smokers could get their fix.

Air Canada Flight 797

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_Canada_Flight_797

Flight Attendant Charged With Setting Fire in Airplane Bathroom

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,356187,00.html

(Note I used Fox as a source because they are more credible and accurate than mainstream media; and it really irks the fascist liberals. Fascists hate facts, logic and free speech)

[Jason]

Interesting, 3 of the 4 incidents involved an Airbus (whoever wrote the article was eager to point that out), but it wasn't mentioned that the AA flight was a Boeing 767-300.

whereas 2 out of those 4 events were an engine failure. the engines are not produced by airbus.
i think that does not mean anything.

[paulomario77]

whereas 2 out of those 4 events were an engine failure. the engines are not produced by airbus.
i think that does not mean anything.

Sure, but the general public are not concerned about the engine manufacturer, the first thing they'll notice on the article is the name "Airbus", specially considering the recent Air France accident. That's why I consider the article "slightly" biased, not that it does not provide true information, but it's the way they chose to present it.

Which statement would you rather hear from your average Joe: "The hell I'm flying in an Airbus!" or "The hell I'm flying in a GE powered aircraft!" ? (just an example, don't know the engine manufacturer in those planes)

[ROM]

But a fire in the bathroom is unheard of.

http://www.avherald.com/h?article=41a45344&opt=0

Incident: El Al B763 near Rome on May 27th 2009, fire alert

An El Al Boeing 767-300, registration 4X-EAR performing flight LY-386 from Rome Fiumicino (Italy) to Tel Aviv (Israel) with 85 passengers and 8 crew, returned to Fiumicino Airport due to a fire alert in one of the lavatories on board shortly after takeoff. The airplane landed safely with emergency services on stand by.

Fire fighters found a cigarette in that lavatory, that had not been fully extinguished.

[ROM]

Sure, but the general public are not concerned about the engine manufacturer, the first thing they'll notice on the article is the name "Airbus", specially considering the recent Air France accident. That's why I consider the article "slightly" biased, not that it does not provide true information, but it's the way they chose to present it.

Which statement would you rather hear from your average Joe: "The hell I'm flying in an Airbus!" or "The hell I'm flying in a GE powered aircraft!" ? (just an example, don't know the engine manufacturer in those planes)

Which goes to show the difference between The Sun and The Guardian is merely the price.