Page 1 of 3

rep . Could you clear something up for me please?

Posted: Tue Nov 21, 2006 11:59 am
by Doombrain
rep wrote:Two words: Explosive decompression.

It happens to several planes a year, usually nothing serious, but in the last few decades there have been a number of casualties because a door or cargo hatch blew off and passengers were blown out.
http://www.quake3world.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=26638

I'd like to know how this could happen. I'm a frequent flyer so I know a little about flight safety. My problem with what you say is:

* airplane doors are not like normal doors and lock with a expanding steel ring which forms an airtight seal and then has three locking rings, again made of solid steel. I have more chance of winning two lotto’s in a row than the door just popping off in flight.

* the cargo area is not pressurized therefore no risk to decompression....

* emergency doors will only open inwards so unless the laws of physics have changed I don’t this that is possible.

* people being sucked out of a plane during explosive decompression would be the last thing on your mind. It’s more lightly to be the struggle to stay conscious due to the sudden and massive loss of air pressure.

.........

Posted: Tue Nov 21, 2006 12:02 pm
by Nightshade
Also, most passengers don't ride in the cargo bay.

Posted: Tue Nov 21, 2006 12:12 pm
by MKJ
Nightshade wrote:Also, most passengers don't ride in the cargo bay.
wait, they dont?
i think i overpaid :(

Posted: Tue Nov 21, 2006 12:14 pm
by Nightshade
lol stupid nigger

Posted: Tue Nov 21, 2006 4:09 pm
by losCHUNK
i know about this one because my parents caught a plane similiar to it the same day. 2 of there engines caught fire aswell (for other reasons) and shit went tits up so it kinda stuck in my mind

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Airlines_Flight_811
As the 747 climbed to between 22,000 and 23,000 feet the R5 cargo door tore open, decompressing the cabin and leaving a gaping hole. Five rows of business class seats were blown out of the aircraft, along with nine passengers, some of whom were drawn into engine three (remains were later found in the engine)[1]. Severely injured, a flight attendant was lying down beside the hole caused by the decompression.

Because the cabin was no longer pressurized, the pilots initiated an emergency descent to reach an altitude with breathable air. The explosion had knocked the number three engine out and the number four engine caught fire. Despite only partial flaps (a portion of the shed fuselage damaged the flaps on one wing) and concerns over the plane's landing gear and structural integrity, the crew made a perfect landing and deployed all ten evacuation slides on the aircraft. The evacuation was completed in 90 seconds, with no additional injuries occurring.
The incident was most likely caused by improper wiring in the R5 cargo door latching mechanism. At the time, the design of the 747-122 provided a small window situated flush against each of the cargo doors, so that the ground crew could visually confirm that the doors' latches were set to the locked position. There were, however, several flaws in this design. It didn't allow a particularly close look at the door latches, and it didn't show the entire latching mechanism, which made the complete inspection of the latched door impossible. Furthermore the circuit controlling electrical power to the doors was faulty and could operate in flight, which caused the doors to unlock. The R5 door, being an outward-opener, blew open and separated from the fuselage.
its the only time ive ever heard of explosive decompression and sounds like whatever argument he made was based on this incident (actually i lie, i know of another :] )

Posted: Tue Nov 21, 2006 4:12 pm
by Doombrain
only 20'000 feet, not 30'000 and the hold was ripped open to the cabin

Posted: Tue Nov 21, 2006 4:13 pm
by Doombrain
and lol i'm taking a 747 tomorrow

hahha

Posted: Tue Nov 21, 2006 4:15 pm
by losCHUNK
tbh i didnt even read his post

i just saw "explosive decompression" then carried on reading your post

where hes saying it happens to several planes a yr is just complete cod shit

Posted: Tue Nov 21, 2006 4:33 pm
by Captain
Doombrain wrote:and lol i'm taking a 747 tomorrow

hahha
737 is a bit too small for 8h flights :(

Posted: Tue Nov 21, 2006 4:36 pm
by Doombrain
Captain Mazda wrote:
Doombrain wrote:and lol i'm taking a 747 tomorrow

hahha
737 is a bit too small for 8h flights :(
that's why i'm taking a 747-400

Posted: Tue Nov 21, 2006 4:37 pm
by Captain
Nice. I'd have enjoyed 747 flights had they not been with Air Canada :icon7:

Posted: Tue Nov 21, 2006 4:40 pm
by losCHUNK
flyings flying, your in a steel tube 30000 feet up with nothing more than a fucking life jacket

Posted: Tue Nov 21, 2006 4:40 pm
by Turbine
Whats wrong with Air Canada?

The bumpy 747 landings you get every year at the end of the summer at Pearson Intl. Airport, when they seem to only land in the worst of weather, with thunderstorms and hail?

Like Air France did two years ago?

Posted: Tue Nov 21, 2006 4:41 pm
by Foo
Explosive Decompression is a bit of a misnomer. It doesn't actually mean Shit Fucking Blows Up (tm). It's to do with reactions caused by sudden loss of pressure around a seal, and the minor explosive results which force a small leak to suddenly result in large loss of pressure.

BTW the quoted disaster happened on a door system with a positive rather than negative seal. It was since updated on all 747s and can't happen again.

Posted: Tue Nov 21, 2006 4:43 pm
by Captain
Turbine wrote:Like Air France did two years ago?
I was shooting my famous thunderstorm footage outside when that happened :icon32: August 19th 2005 btw.

But everything is wrong with Air Canada. The blankets smell like vomit, the service is ghastly, and shit's hit the fan far too many times for them to give a hoot whether you had a nice flight or not. Plus I'm quite iffy when their planes start following suit of Sea King helicopters.

Posted: Tue Nov 21, 2006 4:43 pm
by Turbine
losCHUNK wrote:flyings flying, your in a steel tube 30000 feet up with nothing more than a fucking life jacket
I always found that amusing. How about a parachute. No? ok. :tear:

Posted: Tue Nov 21, 2006 4:44 pm
by Captain
Because if you land in water, you might have small chances of survival :icon32:

Posted: Tue Nov 21, 2006 4:49 pm
by Doombrain
plus jumping at 30'000 feet at 500mph = no good for life

Posted: Tue Nov 21, 2006 4:49 pm
by losCHUNK
Captain Mazda wrote:Because if you land in water, you might have small chances of survival :icon32:
right up until the plane explodes into tiny pieces, resulting in you being buried in a matchbox

i read a story about a prachute blokey in a tandem jump surviving after the chute failed to deploy, all because he landed on top of the other unlucky git

now my plan has always been to take my fat mate, joey, wherever i go. so if we do go hurdling towards the ground i can just jump out with im on the front of me

and for some reason that gives me more hope than a life jacket ever will whilst traveling faster than jesus

Posted: Tue Nov 21, 2006 4:51 pm
by Doombrain
can we shut up about this now?

Posted: Tue Nov 21, 2006 4:51 pm
by +JuggerNaut+
yet we all drive our cars down public roads and don't think twice about it.

Posted: Tue Nov 21, 2006 4:54 pm
by Turbine
Captain Mazda wrote:
Turbine wrote:Like Air France did two years ago?
I was shooting my famous thunderstorm footage outside when that happened :icon32: August 19th 2005 btw.
Did you get wet, I remember that day like it was yesterday. I was in Brampton visiting a friends house, when the clouds started forming, it was getting darker and darker, until it was like night. Then, with one flash of thunder it started to rain like there was no tomorrow. My buss stop came and I went out, in to the torrential downpour of the year. By the time I got to his house -I gave up running it was like swimming in a pool- I was wheat to the bone. I dried up, got some new clothes and then his satellite signal faded back in. The Air France Flight 358 was plastered all over the news. So we made a quick dash to the airport to see what it was like. I seriously thought that there where going to be casualties. There was thick black smoke emanating from where the plane was, right next to the highway. No one got hurt. Amazing, with 297 passengers and 12 crew. Emergency services were on the scene of the crash in under 60 seconds.


[lvlshot]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/f/f2/Airfranceflight358_05.jpg[/lvlshot]
[lvlshot]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/0a/Air_France_Flight_358.jpg[/lvlshot]

Posted: Tue Nov 21, 2006 5:00 pm
by Captain
Oh yeah, I was watching the Weather Network due to the tornado warning. They suddenly got info of the crash so I saw it unfold completely live. At first they thought people had been ejected and burnt alive. Gotta love that "WORST SCENARIO FIRST" bullshit in the media here :/

Posted: Tue Nov 21, 2006 5:09 pm
by Denz
why you askin rep? He don't know.

Posted: Tue Nov 21, 2006 8:34 pm
by S@M
Turbine wrote:Whats wrong with Air Canada?
Like Air France did two years ago?
Air Canada, Air France, and any american airline Ive ever flown on are total shit from a passenger service/comfort perspective. The oldest planes Ive flown on are from Can, France and USA airlines - although make sure your insurance is really pumped and your life fully sorted out before stepping on the tarmac anywhere near an East China airline plane