Catastophic depressurization in a commercial airliner

[[email protected]]

We all have seen the movies were one pistol shot or what not causes
the side of an airliner explode sucking the people, seats, etc. into
the void. What would happen in the reality? Let's assume the plane is
at the cruising altitude.

[N329DF]

> What would happen in the reality? Let's assume the plane is
>at the cruising altitude.
>

it would hiss until someone puts a inflight magazine to a good use and puts it
over the hole. Only if they managed to take out a window would there be a large
loss of cabin pressure,and then only until something like a briefcase can be
put over the opening.

Matt Gunsch,
A&P,IA,Private Pilot
Riding member of the
2003 world champion drill team
Arizona Precision Motorcycle Drill Team
GWRRA,NRA,GOA

[Ragnar]

> wrote in message
om...
> We all have seen the movies were one pistol shot or what not causes
> the side of an airliner explode sucking the people, seats, etc. into
> the void. What would happen in the reality? Let's assume the plane is
> at the cruising altitude.

A bullet hole is nothing. The cabin pressurization systems can handle it.
I had the bottom of a rear door seal (about two feet of seal) fail once, and
all it did was hiss until we threw a bunch of wet paper towels in the hole.

And if you lose a window, sure you'll get everything loose like paper and
small items blowing around, but a regular sized person isn't going to get
sucked out. Might seal up the hole pretty efficiently though.

[Leslie Swartz]

Not much.

The hissing noise would be irksome, though.

Even if it took out a window- and a large window at that- there wold be an
initial puff of wind, then a howling noise.

Oh yeah, all the passengers would begin screaming as they got tangled up in
their oxygen masks/lines.


The big problem would be if the bullet hit something important, like the
beverage cart . . .

Steve Swartz



> wrote in message
om...
> We all have seen the movies were one pistol shot or what not causes
> the side of an airliner explode sucking the people, seats, etc. into
> the void. What would happen in the reality? Let's assume the plane is
> at the cruising altitude.

[John Halliwell]

In article >,
> writes
>We all have seen the movies were one pistol shot or what not causes
>the side of an airliner explode sucking the people, seats, etc. into
>the void. What would happen in the reality? Let's assume the plane is
>at the cruising altitude.

I wouldn't call that 'catastrophic' decompression, one of the best
examples of which would be the Comet crashes and subsequent
investigation which are very well documented. The JAL 747 which lost the
fin when the rear pressure bulkhead failed (although it continued to fly
for nearly an hour before hitting a mountain). A couple of incidents
where DC10s lost cargo doors, causing very serious damage and the loss
of at least one aircraft. A 737 that lost nearly half of the cabin roof
landed safely.

There was the BAC 1-11 where a windscreen was sucked out, sucking the
captain out of his seat and onto the nose. The first officer managed to
land it whilst a steward held onto the captain's legs.

--
John

[Tex Houston]

> wrote in message
om...
> We all have seen the movies were one pistol shot or what not causes
> the side of an airliner explode sucking the people, seats, etc. into
> the void. What would happen in the reality? Let's assume the plane is
> at the cruising altitude.

The subject of your query puzzles me as this is a military aviation forum
but will attempt an answer for you. If it hits nothing vital (electrical,
hydraulic, etc) the answer is...pretty much nothing.

Tex

[Keith Willshaw]

> wrote in message
om...
> We all have seen the movies were one pistol shot or what not causes
> the side of an airliner explode sucking the people, seats, etc. into
> the void. What would happen in the reality? Let's assume the plane is
> at the cruising altitude.

Not much unless a window was taken out and even then while
pillows , papers and magazines would be thrown about
people wouldnt be.

The extreme case is the Aloha airlines 737 which last about 20 ft of cabin
and
managed a safe landing, although some people were killed
on that one.

Keith

[Kevin Brooks]

"Ragnar" > wrote in message >...
> > wrote in message
> om...
> > We all have seen the movies were one pistol shot or what not causes
> > the side of an airliner explode sucking the people, seats, etc. into
> > the void. What would happen in the reality? Let's assume the plane is
> > at the cruising altitude.
>
> A bullet hole is nothing. The cabin pressurization systems can handle it.
> I had the bottom of a rear door seal (about two feet of seal) fail once, and
> all it did was hiss until we threw a bunch of wet paper towels in the hole.
>
> And if you lose a window, sure you'll get everything loose like paper and
> small items blowing around, but a regular sized person isn't going to get
> sucked out. Might seal up the hole pretty efficiently though.

I believe you are generally correct, but there have been exceptions.
ISTR the loss of a USAF crewmember on a C-130, the one engaged by
Peruvian aircraft in during a counterdrug mission, for example?
Subject to correction from anyone who knows what happened, I seem to
remember that a crewmember was sucked out of a rather small opening--I
have not found much about it, other than mention that the attack did
occur in April 1992. On the civil side, passengers have been lost when
they departed (in more ways than one) through not-that-much larger
fuselage openings created due to turbine failures.

Brooks

[[email protected]]

> And if you lose a window, sure you'll get everything loose like paper and
> small items blowing around, but a regular sized person isn't going to get
> sucked out. Might seal up the hole pretty efficiently though.

There's a Russian movie, where exactly that happened. It's a comedy.

However, the gaping hole will not occur?

[John R Weiss]

> wrote...
> We all have seen the movies were one pistol shot or what not causes
> the side of an airliner explode sucking the people, seats, etc. into
> the void. What would happen in the reality? Let's assume the plane is
> at the cruising altitude.

Let's further assume the bullet goes through the aluminum skin. It would result
in a hole about 1/2" in diameter and probably a loud whistling of escaping air.
The outflow valves that control pressurization would close slightly to
compensate for the air loss. You're left with the noise, exacerbated by
screaming/panicking passengers. Put a pillow over the hole to stop the
whistling; that may stop the screaming.

Worse case would be a window. The bullet might cause the entire window to fail.
Since the window is similar in size to the outflow valves, the cabin pressure
would probably begin to decrease slowly as the air rushes out. Unrestrained
objects may be sucked out. A dinner tray or piece of a serving cart could be
used to block the hole, if it could be maneuvered into place.

[av8r]

Hi

There was an incident involving an R.C.A.F. Station Namao-based S.A.C.
KC-135 Stratotanker back in 1961. (S.A.C. maintained a standing tanker
detachment at R.C.A.F. Station Namao, located just north of the city of
Edmonton, Alberta.

The aircraft had been involved in refueling a B-52 north of R.C.A.F.
Station Namao, when one of the windows blew out at altitude and
partially sucked one of the crew out of the aircraft. Apparently the
resulting trauma to his body allowed all the blood to be sucked out. I
talked to an old boomer who recalled the incident and said that when the
plane landed at Namao, there was a stream of frozen blood running along
the side of the fuselage.

Cheers...Chris

[David Lesher]

) writes:

>We all have seen the movies were one pistol shot or what not causes
>the side of an airliner explode sucking the people, seats, etc. into
>the void. What would happen in the reality? Let's assume the plane is
>at the cruising altitude.

You mean like Goldfinger???

Well, here's some results of real testing:

<http://www.google.com/groups?selm=6b6b4da6.0310041342.3dff4b01%40posting .google.com&output=gplain>

This from the TV show "Mythbusters" <http://dsc.discovery.com/fansites/mythbusters/mythbusters.html>
--
A host is a host from coast to
& no one will talk to a host that's close........[v].(301) 56-LINUX
Unless the host (that isn't close).........................pob 1433
is busy, hung or dead....................................20915-1433

[Kevin Brooks]

"Keith Willshaw" > wrote in message >...
> > wrote in message
> om...
> > We all have seen the movies were one pistol shot or what not causes
> > the side of an airliner explode sucking the people, seats, etc. into
> > the void. What would happen in the reality? Let's assume the plane is
> > at the cruising altitude.
>
> Not much unless a window was taken out and even then while
> pillows , papers and magazines would be thrown about
> people wouldnt be.
>
> The extreme case is the Aloha airlines 737 which last about 20 ft of cabin
> and
> managed a safe landing, although some people were killed
> on that one.
>
> Keith

I believe there have been accident reports of much smaller holes than
that Aloha example where passengers were indeed sucked out. The
following sites, taken together, indicate a September 2001 accident
involving a Brazilian Fokker 100 involved one passenger being sucked
out through a window after two windows were taken out due to an
uncontained turbine failure:

www.iasa.com.au/folders/Safety_Issues/ others/cowdied.html
www.pyramid.ch/airsafety_fatal.htm

Obviously a rare case, but it can indeed happen. Likewise, relatively
small fuselage holes caused by bombs have resulted in passenger
loss--ISTR that was the case over Greece a few years back?

Brooks

[[email protected]]

(Kevin Brooks) wrote:

>"Keith Willshaw" > wrote in message >...
>> > wrote in message
>> om...
>> > We all have seen the movies were one pistol shot or what not causes
>> > the side of an airliner explode sucking the people, seats, etc. into
>> > the void. What would happen in the reality? Let's assume the plane is
>> > at the cruising altitude.
>>
>> Not much unless a window was taken out and even then while
>> pillows , papers and magazines would be thrown about
>> people wouldnt be.
>>
>> The extreme case is the Aloha airlines 737 which last about 20 ft of cabin
>> and
>> managed a safe landing, although some people were killed
>> on that one.
>>
>> Keith
>
>I believe there have been accident reports of much smaller holes than
>that Aloha example where passengers were indeed sucked out.

I've been following this thread for awhile and have heard of most
of these incidents before. I notice that 'all' the posts refer to
"People etc being sucked out". Isn't the proper term "Blown out"
by the higher air pressure inside?, rather than being "Sucked out
by the lower air pressure outside?.

I realize that the same effect would be realized in either case
but it seems to go against my grain to call it "Sucked out". Any
thoughts?.
--

-Gord.

[Dave Kearton]

"Gord Beaman" > wrote in message
...
> (Kevin Brooks) wrote:
> I've been following this thread for awhile and have heard of most
> of these incidents before. I notice that 'all' the posts refer to
> "People etc being sucked out". Isn't the proper term "Blown out"
> by the higher air pressure inside?, rather than being "Sucked out
> by the lower air pressure outside?.
>
> I realize that the same effect would be realized in either case
> but it seems to go against my grain to call it "Sucked out". Any
> thoughts?.
> --
>
> -Gord.



You're probably right Gord.

Pressure goes from high to low - under the maxim "nature abhors a vacuum
(but not as much as cats do)"


The individual's perspective also has an effect. If you're strapped
in your seat, watching your tray table disappear through a crack in a
window, then it was blown out.


If you and your tray table are falling in free air after passing through a
crack the size of a keyhole, that sucks.


Cheers


Dave Kearton

[Peter Kemp]

On or about Sun, 19 Oct 2003 01:45:11 GMT, "Gord Beaman"
) allegedly uttered:

(Kevin Brooks) wrote:
>
>>"Keith Willshaw" > wrote in message >...
>>> > wrote in message
>>> om...
>>> > We all have seen the movies were one pistol shot or what not causes
>>> > the side of an airliner explode sucking the people, seats, etc. into
>>> > the void. What would happen in the reality? Let's assume the plane is
>>> > at the cruising altitude.
>>>
>>> Not much unless a window was taken out and even then while
>>> pillows , papers and magazines would be thrown about
>>> people wouldnt be.
>>>
>>> The extreme case is the Aloha airlines 737 which last about 20 ft of cabin
>>> and
>>> managed a safe landing, although some people were killed
>>> on that one.
>>>
>>> Keith
>>
>>I believe there have been accident reports of much smaller holes than
>>that Aloha example where passengers were indeed sucked out.
>
>I've been following this thread for awhile and have heard of most
>of these incidents before. I notice that 'all' the posts refer to
>"People etc being sucked out". Isn't the proper term "Blown out"
>by the higher air pressure inside?, rather than being "Sucked out
>by the lower air pressure outside?.
>
>I realize that the same effect would be realized in either case
>but it seems to go against my grain to call it "Sucked out". Any
>thoughts?.

Well, from my point of view, I remember my Physics degree well - every
time we used the word "suck", my tutor would fail us - surprisingly
hard habit to get out of :-)
---
Peter Kemp

Life is short - Drink Faster

[[email protected]]

Peter Kemp <peter_n_kempathotmaildotcom@> wrote:

>On or about Sun, 19 Oct 2003 01:45:11 GMT, "Gord Beaman"
) allegedly uttered:
>
(Kevin Brooks) wrote:
>>
>>>"Keith Willshaw" > wrote in message >...
>>>> > wrote in message
>>>> om...
>>>> > We all have seen the movies were one pistol shot or what not causes
>>>> > the side of an airliner explode sucking the people, seats, etc. into
>>>> > the void. What would happen in the reality? Let's assume the plane is
>>>> > at the cruising altitude.
>>>>
>>>> Not much unless a window was taken out and even then while
>>>> pillows , papers and magazines would be thrown about
>>>> people wouldnt be.
>>>>
>>>> The extreme case is the Aloha airlines 737 which last about 20 ft of cabin
>>>> and
>>>> managed a safe landing, although some people were killed
>>>> on that one.
>>>>
>>>> Keith
>>>
>>>I believe there have been accident reports of much smaller holes than
>>>that Aloha example where passengers were indeed sucked out.
>>
>>I've been following this thread for awhile and have heard of most
>>of these incidents before. I notice that 'all' the posts refer to
>>"People etc being sucked out". Isn't the proper term "Blown out"
>>by the higher air pressure inside?, rather than being "Sucked out
>>by the lower air pressure outside?.
>>
>>I realize that the same effect would be realized in either case
>>but it seems to go against my grain to call it "Sucked out". Any
>>thoughts?.
>
>Well, from my point of view, I remember my Physics degree well - every
>time we used the word "suck", my tutor would fail us - surprisingly
>hard habit to get out of :-)
>---
>Peter Kemp
>

I agree with him, I think it's a poor way to describe that
action...the outside air molecules are pressing against the
aircraft windows with a certain force, if a window 'ruptures'
then the higher inside air pressure will force itself (and any
objects that it may contain) out into this comparatively lower
pressure.

'Suck' doesn't sound right for this action. (Or perhaps 'any'
action?)
--

-Gord.

[John Keeney]

"Gord Beaman" > wrote in message
...
> (Kevin Brooks) wrote:
>
> >"Keith Willshaw" > wrote in message
>...
> >> > wrote in message
> >> om...
> >> > We all have seen the movies were one pistol shot or what not causes
> >> > the side of an airliner explode sucking the people, seats, etc. into
> >> > the void. What would happen in the reality? Let's assume the plane is
> >> > at the cruising altitude.
> >>
> >> Not much unless a window was taken out and even then while
> >> pillows , papers and magazines would be thrown about
> >> people wouldnt be.
> >>
> >> The extreme case is the Aloha airlines 737 which last about 20 ft of
cabin
> >> and
> >> managed a safe landing, although some people were killed
> >> on that one.
> >>
> >> Keith
> >
> >I believe there have been accident reports of much smaller holes than
> >that Aloha example where passengers were indeed sucked out.
>
> I've been following this thread for awhile and have heard of most
> of these incidents before. I notice that 'all' the posts refer to
> "People etc being sucked out". Isn't the proper term "Blown out"
> by the higher air pressure inside?, rather than being "Sucked out
> by the lower air pressure outside?.
>
> I realize that the same effect would be realized in either case
> but it seems to go against my grain to call it "Sucked out". Any
> thoughts?.

You are right in the sense that vacuum cleaners do not "suck", the
rest of the world blows into them.
You are right in the sense that you don't "suck" drinks through
straws, the atmosphere blows the drinks through.
There is no sucking, only blowing ("blowing" may involve
pressures other than atmospheric.)

Or at least that's what a physicist with the tendencies of a
theoretical mathematician would say. Personally, I understand
that something being "sucked" from one place to another involves
differential pressures with the higher pressure providing the
work but gladly accept either term when the idea is to convey
ideas and the idea was conveyed.

[[email protected]]

"John Keeney" > wrote:

> but gladly accept either term when the idea is to convey
>ideas and the idea was conveyed.
>

Good point John, why does it really matter what the vehicle is as
long as the idea gets across?

Mind you, it does give those of us who have pedantic tendencies
something to do. :)

But then, why travel in a pickup when one could have ridden in
style in a Porche?

Sorry, lost control for a minute there...
--

-Gord.

[[email protected]]

> The subject of your query puzzles me as this is a military aviation forum
> but will attempt an answer for you. If it hits nothing vital (electrical,
> hydraulic, etc) the answer is...pretty much nothing.
>
> Tex

The reason I posted it here is that here is the place where the people
who think about this kind of crap congregate. Like me.

[Regnirps]

"Gord Beaman" ) wrote:

<<I've been following this thread for awhile and have heard of most
of these incidents before. I notice that 'all' the posts refer to
"People etc being sucked out". Isn't the proper term "Blown out"
by the higher air pressure inside?, rather than being "Sucked out
by the lower air pressure outside?.

I realize that the same effect would be realized in either case
but it seems to go against my grain to call it "Sucked out". Any
thoughts?. >>

Right. No such thing as "suction", which implies being pulled instead of
pushed. I suppose since we are talking about bags of fluid and because of the
way hydraulics work, the effect is as if there was something 'sucking' on the
people. It is a handy word but leads the intuition to jump to conclusions.

-- Charlie Springer

[Scet]

"Gord Beaman" > wrote in message
...
> (Kevin Brooks) wrote:
>
> >"Keith Willshaw" > wrote in message
>...
> >> > wrote in message
> >> om...
> >> > We all have seen the movies were one pistol shot or what not causes
> >> > the side of an airliner explode sucking the people, seats, etc. into
> >> > the void. What would happen in the reality? Let's assume the plane is
> >> > at the cruising altitude.
> >>
> >> Not much unless a window was taken out and even then while
> >> pillows , papers and magazines would be thrown about
> >> people wouldnt be.
> >>
> >> The extreme case is the Aloha airlines 737 which last about 20 ft of
cabin
> >> and
> >> managed a safe landing, although some people were killed
> >> on that one.
> >>
> >> Keith
> >
> >I believe there have been accident reports of much smaller holes than
> >that Aloha example where passengers were indeed sucked out.
>
> I've been following this thread for awhile and have heard of most
> of these incidents before. I notice that 'all' the posts refer to
> "People etc being sucked out". Isn't the proper term "Blown out"
> by the higher air pressure inside?, rather than being "Sucked out
> by the lower air pressure outside?.
>
> I realize that the same effect would be realized in either case
> but it seems to go against my grain to call it "Sucked out". Any
> thoughts?.
> --
>
> -Gord.

I agree Gord, the aircraft is pressurised.

Scet

[B2431]

>From: (Regnirps)
>Date: 10/20/2003 2:08 AM Central Daylight Time
>Message-id: >
>
>"Gord Beaman" ) wrote:
>
><<I've been following this thread for awhile and have heard of most
>of these incidents before. I notice that 'all' the posts refer to
>"People etc being sucked out". Isn't the proper term "Blown out"
>by the higher air pressure inside?, rather than being "Sucked out
>by the lower air pressure outside?.
>
>I realize that the same effect would be realized in either case
>but it seems to go against my grain to call it "Sucked out". Any
>thoughts?. >>
>
>Right. No such thing as "suction", which implies being pulled instead of
>pushed. I suppose since we are talking about bags of fluid and because of the
>way hydraulics work, the effect is as if there was something 'sucking' on the
>people. It is a handy word but leads the intuition to jump to conclusions.
>
>-- Charlie Springer
>
In any event an airliner continually vents more air than would be expelled
through a passenger window. If the cabin didn't vent and pressure was
constantly applied the cabin pressure would excede passenger comfort by a few
thousand feet below sea level. There are pressure relief valves, drain holes
leaks around doors etc. It all adds up.


Dan, U. S. Air Force, retired
I guess this means a bullet hole would be meaningless unless it was in
something sensitive like me or in a wiring harness, control cable, fuel tank
etc.