777 Hell in Chicago

[Tomatohead]

http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_4122187

[tscottme]

"Tomatohead" > wrote in message
...
> http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_4122187

Typical "news" story. "Newsflash, Summer brings hot weather, details at 10"

When a reporter experiences real life, that's a news story. If some poor
schlub on the plane had called the reporter after the fact and reported "the
plane we flew from Chicago was hot" the very same reporter and editors that
published this story would have laughed them off the phone.

What quirk of nature caused only the reporter's aircraft to become heat
soaked while sitting in 100 degree weather?

The more news you read, the less you wil know.

--
Scott

[Dave S]

tscottme wrote:
> What quirk of nature caused only the reporter's aircraft to become heat
> soaked while sitting in 100 degree weather?
>

Did you actually read the story?

[Anno v. Heimburg]

tscottme wrote:
> What quirk of nature caused only the reporter's aircraft to become heat
> soaked while sitting in 100 degree weather?

The fact that the APU was malfunctioning, thus no cabin ventilation until
engine start-up, and that the very engine start-up which was instrumental
in preventing slowly boiling the passengers to perfection was delayed for
over two hours.

So, it wasn't simply a hot day, it was a very unprofeesional handling of a
problem with an airplane - by the airline, mind, it seems the crew did the
best they could.

[tscottme]

"Anno v. Heimburg" > wrote in message
...
> tscottme wrote:
>> What quirk of nature caused only the reporter's aircraft to become heat
>> soaked while sitting in 100 degree weather?
>
> The fact that the APU was malfunctioning, thus no cabin ventilation until
> engine start-up, and that the very engine start-up which was instrumental
> in preventing slowly boiling the passengers to perfection was delayed for
> over two hours.
>
> So, it wasn't simply a hot day, it was a very unprofeesional handling of a
> problem with an airplane - by the airline, mind, it seems the crew did the
> best they could.


Most newspapers don't give this much space to a bank robbery or a murder at
convenience store..

The newspaper could have at least posted a poll question to see if its
readers think sitting on a hot plane was:
A. uncomfortable
B. potentially dangerous
C. George Bush's fault.

--
Scott

[Robert M. Gary]

Anno v. Heimburg wrote:
> tscottme wrote:
> > What quirk of nature caused only the reporter's aircraft to become heat
> > soaked while sitting in 100 degree weather?
>
> The fact that the APU was malfunctioning, thus no cabin ventilation until
> engine start-up, and that the very engine start-up which was instrumental
> in preventing slowly boiling the passengers to perfection was delayed for
> over two hours.

But busted APUs are very common. You can bet that United's facility in
Pheonix handles this situation better. The article never explained why
the ground air supply was not sufficient. Does Chicago not have
sufficient facilities to pump air?

-Robert

[Robert Chambers]

That's Daley's down, nothing but hot air unfortunately.

Robert M. Gary wrote:
> Anno v. Heimburg wrote:
>
>>tscottme wrote:
>>
>>>What quirk of nature caused only the reporter's aircraft to become heat
>>>soaked while sitting in 100 degree weather?
>>
>>The fact that the APU was malfunctioning, thus no cabin ventilation until
>>engine start-up, and that the very engine start-up which was instrumental
>>in preventing slowly boiling the passengers to perfection was delayed for
>>over two hours.
>
>
> But busted APUs are very common. You can bet that United's facility in
> Pheonix handles this situation better. The article never explained why
> the ground air supply was not sufficient. Does Chicago not have
> sufficient facilities to pump air?
>
> -Robert
>

[Judah]

"tscottme" > wrote in
:

> Most newspapers don't give this much space to a bank robbery or a murder
> at convenience store..
>
> The newspaper could have at least posted a poll question to see if its
> readers think sitting on a hot plane was:
> A. uncomfortable
> B. potentially dangerous
> C. George Bush's fault.

I was delayed in a plane recently with a failed APU. It wasn't one of the 100
degree days, but it got pretty damned hot and uncomfortable in the cabin
until we reached altitude. I've been on a few planes with failed APUs
recently, and usually they pump air in externally at the gate. For some
reason they didn't do it on this plane, so it was hot as soon as we boarded.

We sat in the runup pad ("penalty box") for about a while, and then the
captain announced that we would be held up for about 45 minutes and he would
have to shut down one of the engines and the air conditioner because of fuel
requirements. After a few people got up to get water from the flight
attendants, they had the balls to start turning people away saying that there
was no water left. (Of course, somehow during the flight after it had cooled
off and they were doing their serving, somehow they "miraculously" had
water.)

The heat was uncomfortable. The situation was potentially dangerous (if
nothing else from potential rioting). And it was without a doubt George
Bush's fault. (Isn't everything?)

[[email protected]]

Judah wrote:
> After a few people got up to get water from the flight
> attendants, they had the balls to start turning people away saying that there
> was no water left. (Of course, somehow during the flight after it had cooled
> off and they were doing their serving, somehow they "miraculously" had
> water.)

Maybe they can't take off without some minimum amount of potable water?

[Sam Spade]

tscottme wrote:
> "Tomatohead" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_4122187
>
>
> Typical "news" story. "Newsflash, Summer brings hot weather, details at 10"
>
> When a reporter experiences real life, that's a news story. If some poor
> schlub on the plane had called the reporter after the fact and reported "the
> plane we flew from Chicago was hot" the very same reporter and editors that
> published this story would have laughed them off the phone.
>
> What quirk of nature caused only the reporter's aircraft to become heat
> soaked while sitting in 100 degree weather?
>
> The more news you read, the less you wil know.
>
The story seemed quite straight-forward to me.

I had a recent such experience on Southwest at Phoenix and they didn't
even have the courtesy to provide any explanation. But, it distracted
the flight attendants sufficiently that they didn't give the cabin
safety announcement until after takeoff (a clear and blatant FAR violation).

[Judah]

Sam Spade > wrote in news:Xu1Bg.489$0F5.416@fed1read04:

> tscottme wrote:
>
> I had a recent such experience on Southwest at Phoenix and they didn't
> even have the courtesy to provide any explanation. But, it distracted
> the flight attendants sufficiently that they didn't give the cabin
> safety announcement until after takeoff (a clear and blatant FAR
> violation).

And as a result, everyone in the cabin left their seatbelts off until the
crew explained how to operate them. The risk to everyone on the plane and on
the ground, not to mention national security, was out of control.

I'm surprised it didn't make national news.

What I'd really like to know is, when exactly did they start putting floats
on airliners? ("... In the event of a Water Landing, your seat cushion may be
used as a floatation device...")

[Sam Spade]

Judah wrote:
> Sam Spade > wrote in news:Xu1Bg.489$0F5.416@fed1read04:
>
>
>>tscottme wrote:
>>
>>I had a recent such experience on Southwest at Phoenix and they didn't
>>even have the courtesy to provide any explanation. But, it distracted
>>the flight attendants sufficiently that they didn't give the cabin
>>safety announcement until after takeoff (a clear and blatant FAR
>>violation).
>
>
> And as a result, everyone in the cabin left their seatbelts off until the
> crew explained how to operate them. The risk to everyone on the plane and on
> the ground, not to mention national security, was out of control.
>
You obviously have never been involved in Part 121 operations. And, you
probably ignore the safety announcements because you realize that is
just for the little people.

> I'm surprised it didn't make national news.
>
> What I'd really like to know is, when exactly did they start putting floats
> on airliners? ("... In the event of a Water Landing, your seat cushion may be
> used as a floatation device...")

[Robert M. Gary]

wrote:
> Maybe they can't take off without some minimum amount of potable water?

That's probably true, but for some reason soda could too. I've been on
many international flights where they refuse to give you water because
they claim they don't have enough water but sodas can be had the entire
trip.

-robert

[[email protected]]

Judah wrote:
> What I'd really like to know is, when exactly did they start putting floats
> on airliners? ("... In the event of a Water Landing, your seat cushion may be
> used as a floatation device...")

"Well, imagine that, my seat cusion!.... just what I need: to float
around the North Atlantic for several days, clinging to a pillow full
of beer farts" - George Carlin

;)

[Sam Spade]

wrote:

> Judah wrote:
>
>>What I'd really like to know is, when exactly did they start putting floats
>>on airliners? ("... In the event of a Water Landing, your seat cushion may be
>>used as a floatation device...")
>
>
> "Well, imagine that, my seat cusion!.... just what I need: to float
> around the North Atlantic for several days, clinging to a pillow full
> of beer farts" - George Carlin
>
> ;)
>
After the successful ditching of a great big jet into the ocean, an
event as unlikely as winning the lottery.

[[email protected]]

Andrey Serbinenko wrote:
> >> "Well, imagine that, my seat cusion!.... just what I need: to float
> >> around the North Atlantic for several days, clinging to a pillow full
> >> of beer farts" - George Carlin
> >>
> >> ;)
> >>
> > After the successful ditching of a great big jet into the ocean, an
> > event as unlikely as winning the lottery.
>
> Something's telling me that after such an event there'd be a lot more
> in that seat cusion... :)

I noticed the smiley ;)

[Judah]

Sam Spade > wrote in news:LKmBg.541$0F5.227@fed1read04:

> You obviously have never been involved in Part 121 operations. And, you

That depends on your definition of involved. I have more hours flying Part
121 flights than I do flying Part 91. But not as PIC, only as passenger. And
even that is only because I started flying Part 121 when I was 6 months old,
and didn't start flying part 91 until I was about 30.

> probably ignore the safety announcements because you realize that is
> just for the little people.

Your conclusions are completely inaccurate. How could I ever know the safety
announcements by heart if I was ignoring them?

And which little people are you referring to? The little people under the
stairs, or the little people who are the only ones left that actually still
fit in the seats?

[Sam Spade]

Judah wrote:

> Sam Spade > wrote in news:LKmBg.541$0F5.227@fed1read04:
>
>
>>You obviously have never been involved in Part 121 operations. And, you
>
>
> That depends on your definition of involved. I have more hours flying Part
> 121 flights than I do flying Part 91. But not as PIC, only as passenger. And
> even that is only because I started flying Part 121 when I was 6 months old,
> and didn't start flying part 91 until I was about 30.
>
My definition of involved means being employed ub 121 flight operations
where you hear folks like you who say they have all the instruction they
need to safely participate in an emergency evacuation.
>
>>probably ignore the safety announcements because you realize that is
>>just for the little people.
>
>
> Your conclusions are completely inaccurate. How could I ever know the safety
> announcements by heart if I was ignoring them?

They vary by type of aircraft. I was in the business for 27 years and
when I rode as a passenger on aircraft on which I was not trained and
qualified I would have to refer to the seat pocket card to really
understand what the evacuation would be like on that aircraft type.
>
> And which little people are you referring to? The little people under the
> stairs, or the little people who are the only ones left that actually still
> fit in the seats?

[Judah]

Sam Spade > wrote in news:m_fFg.2981$cw.1193@fed1read03:

> Judah wrote:
>
>> Sam Spade > wrote in
>> news:LKmBg.541$0F5.227@fed1read04:
>>
>>
>>>You obviously have never been involved in Part 121 operations. And,
>>>you
>>
>>
>> That depends on your definition of involved. I have more hours flying
>> Part 121 flights than I do flying Part 91. But not as PIC, only as
>> passenger. And even that is only because I started flying Part 121 when
>> I was 6 months old, and didn't start flying part 91 until I was about
>> 30.
>>
> My definition of involved means being employed ub 121 flight operations
> where you hear folks like you who say they have all the instruction they
> need to safely participate in an emergency evacuation.

I've never made such a claim. Quite the opposite, in fact. I do not
believe that I could ever get enough training to ensure my safe emergency
evacuation of an Airliner, especially from a pocket card or a 60 second
taxi brief. I am not convinced that 80-250 panicked passengers could
realistically be evacuated safely in a true emergency, except with calm
and controlled direction from a well-trained crew.

>>>probably ignore the safety announcements because you realize that is
>>>just for the little people.
>>
>>
>> Your conclusions are completely inaccurate. How could I ever know the
>> safety announcements by heart if I was ignoring them?
>
> They vary by type of aircraft. I was in the business for 27 years and
> when I rode as a passenger on aircraft on which I was not trained and
> qualified I would have to refer to the seat pocket card to really
> understand what the evacuation would be like on that aircraft type.

If it will make you feel better, my cynical sense of humor is in fact
backed by the fact that I generally do pay enough attention to either the
briefing or the pocket card to determine the specifics requirements in an
emergency. Whether I must use my seat cushion, or whether there is a life
vest under my seat; whether the oxygen masks will deploy automatically, or
whether I need to retrieve them and plug them in myself; and most
importantly, where the nearest emergency exit is, even if it is behind me.

However, I have yet to be on an airliner where anyone found any use in the
extensive description of how to operate a seatbelt, especially considering
the fact that the crew requires all passengers to be seated with their
seatbelts fastened before doing the briefing...

And I still strongly suspect that in the event of a "water landing"
neither life vest nor seat cushion is going to help me...

[Sam Spade]

Judah wrote:

>
> And I still strongly suspect that in the event of a "water landing"
> neither life vest nor seat cushion is going to help me...

You have that one right. ;-)

Having said that, evacuations can be quite successful with aborted
takeoff and landing overshoots, like the one in Canada..was it last year?

Crew training is predicated on a moderatly damaged aircraft, where most
passengers are still able-bodied, and there is about 2 to 3 minutes
before fire and smoke take over.

[David Cartwright]

"Sam Spade" > wrote in message
news:m_fFg.2981$cw.1193@fed1read03...
> They vary by type of aircraft. I was in the business for 27 years and
> when I rode as a passenger on aircraft on which I was not trained and
> qualified I would have to refer to the seat pocket card to really
> understand what the evacuation would be like on that aircraft type.

In my experience, the seat pocket cards very wildly in usefulness. I've seen
some very good ones, but on a recent shortish-haul flight the only thing I
could really comprehend properly was the location of the exits - although
there were pictures of aircraft landing on water and people wearing
lifejackets, it didn't really tell the reader anything at all.

The problem is that they try to do it all with diagrams, to reduce the
dependence on the passenger understanding stuff written in a particular
lanuguage, but the diagrams are often a bit weird.

David C