SkyWest smoke in cabin
05-01-2017 | 02:41 PM
#11
Thread Starter
Banned
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,006
Likes: 0
From: doggy style
Also they didn't go to a gate. They went to the ramp area. Not sure why evacuation on a closed runway would be any less safe.
Ever heard of Air Canada 797? That crew didn't think the smoke was a big deal either and delayed evacuation by 90 seconds.
Swiss 111?
Shall I go on?
05-01-2017 | 03:19 PM
#13
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 3,493
Likes: 297
From: 737 FO
Ah, and how would one know that?
Also they didn't go to a gate. They went to the ramp area. Not sure why evacuation on a closed runway would be any less safe.
Ever heard of Air Canada 797? That crew didn't think the smoke was a big deal either and delayed evacuation by 90 seconds.
Swiss 111?
Shall I go on?
Also they didn't go to a gate. They went to the ramp area. Not sure why evacuation on a closed runway would be any less safe.
Ever heard of Air Canada 797? That crew didn't think the smoke was a big deal either and delayed evacuation by 90 seconds.
Swiss 111?
Shall I go on?
05-01-2017 | 03:48 PM
#15
Prime Minister/Moderator
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 45,127
Likes: 796
From: Engines Turn or People Swim
DENpilot has a long and established history of offensive behavior. Don't take it personally.
05-01-2017 | 04:03 PM
#16
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jul 2013
Posts: 12,531
Likes: 1,128
Ah, and how would one know that?
Also they didn't go to a gate. They went to the ramp area. Not sure why evacuation on a closed runway would be any less safe.
Ever heard of Air Canada 797? That crew didn't think the smoke was a big deal either and delayed evacuation by 90 seconds.
Swiss 111?
Shall I go on?
Also they didn't go to a gate. They went to the ramp area. Not sure why evacuation on a closed runway would be any less safe.
Ever heard of Air Canada 797? That crew didn't think the smoke was a big deal either and delayed evacuation by 90 seconds.
Swiss 111?
Shall I go on?
The crew asked the tower if smoke or flames were visible from the tower. No. The smoke in the cabin was light at worst. It was not increasing or billowing. There were most likely no firebells. So, instead of evacuating on an active taxiway or runway, they took a minute or two to taxi to a ramp. Good job.
Most likely a malfunctioning PACK and isolated by the QRH. Great job by the crew.
05-01-2017 | 04:56 PM
#17
Line Holder
Joined: Oct 2013
Posts: 521
Likes: 1
1) There was never a fire on board, it was oil that leaked into one of the PACKs.
2) SkyWest SOP is to stop and evaluate the situation before acting rashly, like dumping 50+ people out onto an active runway/taxiway without first assessing the situation.
3) After the crew evaluated the source of the smoke, and deemed the likelihood of an active fire onboard to be remote, they opted to orderly deplane the pax. There was never an evacuation, because there was no need for one. An evacuation would entail all 4 exits, including the overwing exits, and galley service door.
Last edited by SMACFUM; 05-01-2017 at 05:21 PM.
05-01-2017 | 05:31 PM
#18
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 2,191
Likes: 7
I Remember watching a movie in ground school about a I believe delta or northwest crew in Seattle or something that evaced a 767 after the ARFF crew told them not to and several people got hurt because of it. It's called CRM, probably were told by the trained professionals that they didn't see a immediate threat.
05-01-2017 | 05:34 PM
#19
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 707
Likes: 0
From: lav dumper
Most likely just a major fume event. Read up on it. People have died over those oil fumes. Aerotoxic.org
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
