Punctured pressure cabin.

In message , Johnny Bravo
writes
On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 23:06:55 +0000, "M. J. Powell"
wrote:


There has been a bit of a furore over here concerning the new US
requirement to airlines to supply air marshals when requested. The
concern is mainly over the possible puncture of a pressure cabin.
What do readers think is the result of decompression via a bullet hole?

Boeing engineers estimate that a 9-inch diameter hole would be
necessary before the automatic pressurizing equipment of a 767 would
be unable to maintain cabin pressure.

Or roughly 650 holes, each 9mm across. I can't imagine a gunfight
inside an airliner that would end up with 650 holes in the outer skin
of the plane since most of the rounds are going to be fired to the
front or rear. Even so, most of those holes can easily be plugged for
the short duration of the flight to the nearest airport, just put one
of those stupid platic covered "In case of Emergency" cards over them.
That would take care of about 250 of them on a 767, I'm sure the
in-flight magazines would easily take care of 600-700 more. Bubble
gum would be good for another 100 or so. What's that, about 5,000
total rounds fired (assuming 1/3 of them hit a wall and leave a hole)?
An average of 20 per passenger, two whole post-ban clips before the
air pressure of the cabin becomes compromised and requires a decent,
which would be in progress anyway once the flight crew becomes aware
of 5,000 rounds fired inside the plane.

Wow!

Mike
--
M.J.Powell

In article ,
Cub Driver wrote:

Could you guys clip a bit more heavily, or else put your replies at
the top?

Top posting is a bad thing.

Just teach them how to edit.

--
cirby at cfl.rr.com

Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations.
Slam on brakes accordingly.

On 01 Jan 2004 22:19:37 GMT, B2431 wrote:
From: Cub Driver
Date: 1/1/2004 2:00 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

FWIW, tomorrow (Friday) night on The Discovery Channel's "Myth Busters"
program, one of their projects is rapid decomp of an airliner.

Will somebody summarize the findings here, for the sake of us pathetic
losers with antennas in the attic?

all the best -- Dan Ford
email:

The urban myth in question was that a passenger heard a funny noise coming from
the window. He summoned a stewardess who leaned forward to listen and was blown
through the window when it blew. Supposedly she exited the window like
"toothpaste from a tube."

The show has experts, altitude chambers etc all of which proved it could never
happen.

Something like that did happen, though, on 3 November 1973.

A National Airlines DC-10 (flight 27, between Houston and Las
Vegas) was cruising at 39,000 feet over New Mexico when the number
3 engine's fan assembly disintegrated. Fan blades penetrated the
fuselage and one of the cabin windows, and a passenger seated in
seat 17H was forced out through the missing window. The victim's
seatbelt was fastened, and briefly prevented him from going
completely out the window. Another passenger tried to pull
him back in, but was unsuccessful.

After an emergency descent, the DC-10 landed safely at Albuquerque.
An extensive ground search for the passenger's body was conducted,
but his remains were never found.

As far as I know, this is the only case of a person being blown
(sucked, pulled, whatever) completely through a missing aircraft
window during a rapid decompression.


ljd

In article ,
Laurence Doering wrote:

Something like that did happen, though, on 3 November 1973.

A National Airlines DC-10 (flight 27, between Houston and Las
Vegas) was cruising at 39,000 feet over New Mexico when the number
3 engine's fan assembly disintegrated. Fan blades penetrated the
fuselage and one of the cabin windows, and a passenger seated in
seat 17H was forced out through the missing window. The victim's
seatbelt was fastened, and briefly prevented him from going
completely out the window. Another passenger tried to pull
him back in, but was unsuccessful.

After an emergency descent, the DC-10 landed safely at Albuquerque.
An extensive ground search for the passenger's body was conducted,
but his remains were never found.

As far as I know, this is the only case of a person being blown
(sucked, pulled, whatever) completely through a missing aircraft
window during a rapid decompression.

In 1990, a British Airways pilot almost got sucked out of his plane at
17,000 feet when a piece of the windshield fell off. He was wearing his
seatbelt, but got pulled under it. A flight steward held on to him
until another steward strapped into the seat and helped hold on. The
co-pilot landed the plane, and the pilot survived with some broken bones
and a case of frostbite.

And, one would assume, a need for clean underwear.

--
cirby at cfl.rr.com

Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations.
Slam on brakes accordingly.

"Kevin Brooks" wrote in message
. ..



It went down (occured in '74). ISTR another incident over Japan with
similar
results?

Brooks

Not quite

There were 2 DC-10 depressurusation events

The first happened over Ontario , the cargo hatch opened
in flight due to a damaged latch which wasnt fully closed. The
floor collapsed damaging control cables , the crew managed to make
an emergency landing and a bulletin was sent out recommending
changes be made but no mandatory notice was issued.

The second incident involved a Turkish airlines DC-10 over
France. The hatch again opened and this time the aircraft
crashed killing 346 people

The Japanese incident involved the failure of the incorrectly
repaired tail pressure bulkhead on a 747. The repair was carried
out under Boeing supervision and their engineer screwed up.

The pressure vented into the tail fin blowing off most of the vertical
stabiliser.

Keith

"Emmanuel.Gustin" wrote in message
...
M. J. Powell wrote:



There is also the risk of bullets bouncing around inside
the plane and doing damage to power lines, fuel systems,
etc. Historically, fire has been the major killer of
aircraft following projectile damage.



The chances of bullets bouncing around is pretty low especially
if low velocity and/or frangible rounds are used. I doubt anyone
has shot down an aircraft larger than a Sopwith Camel using
a pistol

Seems to me that although loss of cabin pressure is serious
concern (IIRC military aircraft were designed to maintain
lower cabin pressure than airliners, to limit the damage
amplification following a hit) but not the most serious one.
The worst problem is the prospect of a gun battle in a cabin
packed with people. Almost every stray bullet is going to
hit someone; even if the sky marshall hits the right man
(or woman) the bullet seems likely to hit others as well.

This is going to require very fine judgment by the sky
marshall. He or she also has to distinguish between a
conventional hijack best dealt with by negotiation (are
sky marshalls trained to conduct hostage-release
negotiations?)

I'm afraid since Sept 11 all hijackings have to be considered
suicide actions and treated accordingly. The hijackers that
day acted as would be expected of conventional hijackers
right up to the last minute.

Keith

In message , Chad Irby
writes
In article ,
Laurence Doering wrote:

Something like that did happen, though, on 3 November 1973.

A National Airlines DC-10 (flight 27, between Houston and Las
Vegas) was cruising at 39,000 feet over New Mexico when the number
3 engine's fan assembly disintegrated. Fan blades penetrated the
fuselage and one of the cabin windows, and a passenger seated in
seat 17H was forced out through the missing window. The victim's
seatbelt was fastened, and briefly prevented him from going
completely out the window. Another passenger tried to pull
him back in, but was unsuccessful.

After an emergency descent, the DC-10 landed safely at Albuquerque.
An extensive ground search for the passenger's body was conducted,
but his remains were never found.

As far as I know, this is the only case of a person being blown
(sucked, pulled, whatever) completely through a missing aircraft
window during a rapid decompression.

In 1990, a British Airways pilot almost got sucked out of his plane at
17,000 feet when a piece of the windshield fell off. He was wearing his
seatbelt, but got pulled under it. A flight steward held on to him
until another steward strapped into the seat and helped hold on. The
co-pilot landed the plane, and the pilot survived with some broken bones
and a case of frostbite.

And, one would assume, a need for clean underwear.

There was also the case of the Yugoslav air stewardess who left the
plane at about 30k and survived.

Mike
--
M.J.Powell

In article ,
"M. J. Powell" wrote:

There was also the case of the Yugoslav air stewardess who left the
plane at about 30k and survived.

It wasn't so much a case of her leaving the plane as the plane leaving
her, since she was in the tail of the plane when a bomb went off and
blew the tail off.

--
cirby at cfl.rr.com

Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations.
Slam on brakes accordingly.

In message , Chad Irby
writes
In article ,
"M. J. Powell" wrote:

There was also the case of the Yugoslav air stewardess who left the
plane at about 30k and survived.

It wasn't so much a case of her leaving the plane as the plane leaving
her, since she was in the tail of the plane when a bomb went off and
blew the tail off.

Oh, right. There was also the case of the RAF rear-gunner who dropped
about 15k w/o a parachute. I believe the Germans gave him a certificate
to certify the fact.

Mike
--
M.J.Powell

From: "Kevin Brooks"


What started this is your continued assertion that rapid decompression is no
big deal, in spite of there having been related fatalities, and rather
substantial injuries as noted in the Aer Lingus case.

Brooks


Dan, U. S. Air Force, retired


No, go back and see what I said in the first place. I said a blown out window
would not be catastrophic.

I have been unable to find a single case of a blown out window being
catastrophic.

Dan, U. S. Air Force, retired