Asiana Cargo 744 Crash
07-30-2011, 08:35 PM
#31
Back on TDY
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: 747-400 Captain
Posts: 12,487
Originally Posted by jungle
My point exactly, this points to complete regulatory failure, the only groups actually doing something about this are within private industry. Voting present just doesn't get it.
Not a single NTSB report has named the batteries as a causal factor. Read them yourself.
Please feel free to quote anything to the contrary.
Until you have had the "pleasure" of participating in an investigation involving your friends, you obviously don't understand the failure.
Not a single NTSB report has named the batteries as a causal factor. Read them yourself.
Please feel free to quote anything to the contrary.
Until you have had the "pleasure" of participating in an investigation involving your friends, you obviously don't understand the failure.
Originally Posted by jungle
Narrator: A new car built by my company leaves somewhere traveling at 60 mph. The rear differential locks up. The car crashes and burns with everyone trapped inside. Now, should we initiate a recall? Take the number of vehicles in the field, A, multiply by the probable rate of failure, B, multiply by the average out-of-court settlement, C. A times B times C equals X. If X is less than the cost of a recall, we don't do one.
Woman on plane: Are there a lot of these kinds of accidents?
Narrator: You wouldn't believe.
Woman on plane: Which car company do you work for?
Narrator: A major one.
[Plane turns heavily, narrator thinks to himself]: Every time the plane banked sharply, I prayed for a crash, or mid air collision, I wonder what the insurance claim for something like that would be.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Woman on plane: Are there a lot of these kinds of accidents?
Narrator: You wouldn't believe.
Woman on plane: Which car company do you work for?
Narrator: A major one.
[Plane turns heavily, narrator thinks to himself]: Every time the plane banked sharply, I prayed for a crash, or mid air collision, I wonder what the insurance claim for something like that would be.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carl
07-30-2011, 09:07 PM
#32
With The Resistance
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Burning the Agitprop of the Apparat
Posts: 6,191
Originally Posted by Carl Spackler
If the above was your point exactly, you should learn to get to it quicker. Because when you post stuff like this:
It tells me that you should sober up before you post.
Carl
It tells me that you should sober up before you post.
Carl
The regulators have done zero to prevent these events. We all know it, most of us can't admit it.
Come back when you have any facts to the contrary.
07-30-2011, 11:21 PM
#33
Back on TDY
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: 747-400 Captain
Posts: 12,487
Originally Posted by jungle
And yet you have no factual information to counter anything I have said,
Originally Posted by jungle
Narrator: A new car built by my company leaves somewhere traveling at 60 mph. The rear differential locks up. The car crashes and burns with everyone trapped inside. Now, should we initiate a recall? Take the number of vehicles in the field, A, multiply by the probable rate of failure, B, multiply by the average out-of-court settlement, C. A times B times C equals X. If X is less than the cost of a recall, we don't do one.
Woman on plane: Are there a lot of these kinds of accidents?
Narrator: You wouldn't believe.
Woman on plane: Which car company do you work for?
Narrator: A major one.
[Plane turns heavily, narrator thinks to himself]: Every time the plane banked sharply, I prayed for a crash, or mid air collision, I wonder what the insurance claim for something like that would be.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Woman on plane: Are there a lot of these kinds of accidents?
Narrator: You wouldn't believe.
Woman on plane: Which car company do you work for?
Narrator: A major one.
[Plane turns heavily, narrator thinks to himself]: Every time the plane banked sharply, I prayed for a crash, or mid air collision, I wonder what the insurance claim for something like that would be.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally Posted by jungle
keep defending the incompetent and corrupt and you will be just where you are now.
Originally Posted by jungle
The regulators have done zero to prevent these events. We all know it, most of us can't admit it.
Carl
07-31-2011, 02:21 PM
#34
Line Holder
Joined APC: Apr 2007
Posts: 77
Originally Posted by jungle
Narrator: A new car built by my company leaves somewhere traveling at 60 mph. The rear differential locks up. The car crashes and burns with everyone trapped inside. Now, should we initiate a recall? Take the number of vehicles in the field, A, multiply by the probable rate of failure, B, multiply by the average out-of-court settlement, C. A times B times C equals X. If X is less than the cost of a recall, we don't do one.
Woman on plane: Are there a lot of these kinds of accidents?
Narrator: You wouldn't believe.
Woman on plane: Which car company do you work for?
Narrator: A major one.
[Plane turns heavily, narrator thinks to himself]: Every time the plane banked sharply, I prayed for a crash, or mid air collision, I wonder what the insurance claim for something like that would be.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I get it, that is Ed Norton in Fight Club.
But to those who lost their lives and those that will in the future, I sure hope and pray something is done about the LI batteries we all (pax and cargo) seem to have onboard flying all over the world.
Narrator: A new car built by my company leaves somewhere traveling at 60 mph. The rear differential locks up. The car crashes and burns with everyone trapped inside. Now, should we initiate a recall? Take the number of vehicles in the field, A, multiply by the probable rate of failure, B, multiply by the average out-of-court settlement, C. A times B times C equals X. If X is less than the cost of a recall, we don't do one.
Woman on plane: Are there a lot of these kinds of accidents?
Narrator: You wouldn't believe.
Woman on plane: Which car company do you work for?
Narrator: A major one.
[Plane turns heavily, narrator thinks to himself]: Every time the plane banked sharply, I prayed for a crash, or mid air collision, I wonder what the insurance claim for something like that would be.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I get it, that is Ed Norton in Fight Club.
But to those who lost their lives and those that will in the future, I sure hope and pray something is done about the LI batteries we all (pax and cargo) seem to have onboard flying all over the world.
07-31-2011, 03:16 PM
#35
With The Resistance
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Burning the Agitprop of the Apparat
Posts: 6,191
Originally Posted by HankHill
Originally Posted by jungle
Narrator: A new car built by my company leaves somewhere traveling at 60 mph. The rear differential locks up. The car crashes and burns with everyone trapped inside. Now, should we initiate a recall? Take the number of vehicles in the field, A, multiply by the probable rate of failure, B, multiply by the average out-of-court settlement, C. A times B times C equals X. If X is less than the cost of a recall, we don't do one.
Woman on plane: Are there a lot of these kinds of accidents?
Narrator: You wouldn't believe.
Woman on plane: Which car company do you work for?
Narrator: A major one.
[Plane turns heavily, narrator thinks to himself]: Every time the plane banked sharply, I prayed for a crash, or mid air collision, I wonder what the insurance claim for something like that would be.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I get it, that is Ed Norton in Fight Club.
But to those who lost their lives and those that will in the future, I sure hope and pray something is done about the LI batteries we all (pax and cargo) seem to have onboard flying all over the world.
Narrator: A new car built by my company leaves somewhere traveling at 60 mph. The rear differential locks up. The car crashes and burns with everyone trapped inside. Now, should we initiate a recall? Take the number of vehicles in the field, A, multiply by the probable rate of failure, B, multiply by the average out-of-court settlement, C. A times B times C equals X. If X is less than the cost of a recall, we don't do one.
Woman on plane: Are there a lot of these kinds of accidents?
Narrator: You wouldn't believe.
Woman on plane: Which car company do you work for?
Narrator: A major one.
[Plane turns heavily, narrator thinks to himself]: Every time the plane banked sharply, I prayed for a crash, or mid air collision, I wonder what the insurance claim for something like that would be.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I get it, that is Ed Norton in Fight Club.
But to those who lost their lives and those that will in the future, I sure hope and pray something is done about the LI batteries we all (pax and cargo) seem to have onboard flying all over the world.
My boy Carl is often a little slow on the uptake, but he more than makes up for it with highly repetitive gibberish. God bless his little heart.
07-31-2011, 03:19 PM
#36
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2007
Position: Capt
Posts: 3,215
If i remember correctly-read the posts a long time ago: Fedex developed their own wide-body main deck fire suppression system. It works on both metal containers and palletized cargo. They were installing them on all their widebodys. I don't know if it works on lithium batteries, but I don't see why it couldn't be adopted to suppress those fires also. They were planning on selling it to other companies.
I think all the 747s need to be retrofitted with this system, regardless of the lithium battery situation.
As others have noted, not allowing shipments of lithium batteries on aircraft would help. For items like the ipad, the battery could be built to be installed, just like a computer battery. If apple builds the ipads/batteries in another continent than the one they are selling them on, they can transport the batteries by sea, and install them in the other continent before they are delivered.
On the other hand, making a new type of battery (or energy source) that doesn't catch fire would also be nice.
cliff
PVG
I think all the 747s need to be retrofitted with this system, regardless of the lithium battery situation.
As others have noted, not allowing shipments of lithium batteries on aircraft would help. For items like the ipad, the battery could be built to be installed, just like a computer battery. If apple builds the ipads/batteries in another continent than the one they are selling them on, they can transport the batteries by sea, and install them in the other continent before they are delivered.
On the other hand, making a new type of battery (or energy source) that doesn't catch fire would also be nice.
cliff
PVG
08-01-2011, 12:58 PM
#37
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,001
The issue with the lithium batteries are threefold:
What does this mean for cargo pilots?
If you have a thermal runaway on a pallet, you're not going to be able to control it unless you can recognize it and properly administer to it. A 'particle detector' triggered fire detection system will accurately show there's smoke, but where's the event itself? The nature of air circulation in an aircraft while pressurized, particularly on the main deck of a 747, results in the particle detector that is triggering is not necessarily representative of the location of the pallet producing the smoke. Furthermore, if the lithium battery 'running away' is located in the middle of a pallet of hundreds of items (rather than on the accessible 'exterior' of the pallet), you're not going to be able to effectively cool it, even if you know EXACTLY where it is and how to cool it.
Check out this FAA video to get a full understanding of the problem, and how to properly fight a thermal runaway. Skip ahead to 6:14 into the video to see why using a Halon fire extinguisher is NOT effective.
Whether a lithium battery issue or something else, we must always hope that something can be gained from the recent tragedies of both UPS and Asiana.
- The way they're packaged (internally within the device), and the amount of them (usually hundreds of these devices on a pallet) make it difficult to identify a thermal runaway issue before it's out of control, especially from the flightdeck.
- Once a thermal runaway occurs, to 'supress' or 'extinguish' the runaway requires cooling the thermal issue, whereas most other on-board fires are controlled by denying oxygen through the use of halon and/or depressurization. Halon and/or depressurization will not effectively suppress a thermal runaway event.
- Because these thermal runaways usually lead to total hull loss, it is impossible to determine EXACTLY where the fire started, only that the lithium batteries where some of the cargo items to burn first. The shipping industry therefore maintains that the batteries are not the ignition source, so the current regulations are satisfactory. This is the issue that 'Jungle' pointed out.
What does this mean for cargo pilots?
If you have a thermal runaway on a pallet, you're not going to be able to control it unless you can recognize it and properly administer to it. A 'particle detector' triggered fire detection system will accurately show there's smoke, but where's the event itself? The nature of air circulation in an aircraft while pressurized, particularly on the main deck of a 747, results in the particle detector that is triggering is not necessarily representative of the location of the pallet producing the smoke. Furthermore, if the lithium battery 'running away' is located in the middle of a pallet of hundreds of items (rather than on the accessible 'exterior' of the pallet), you're not going to be able to effectively cool it, even if you know EXACTLY where it is and how to cool it.
Check out this FAA video to get a full understanding of the problem, and how to properly fight a thermal runaway. Skip ahead to 6:14 into the video to see why using a Halon fire extinguisher is NOT effective.
Whether a lithium battery issue or something else, we must always hope that something can be gained from the recent tragedies of both UPS and Asiana.
08-01-2011, 01:20 PM
#38
With The Resistance
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Burning the Agitprop of the Apparat
Posts: 6,191
Originally Posted by Sniper
The issue with the lithium batteries are threefold:
What does this mean for cargo pilots?
If you have a thermal runaway on a pallet, you're not going to be able to control it unless you can recognize it and properly administer to it. A 'particle detector' triggered fire detection system will accurately show there's smoke, but where's the event itself? The nature of air circulation in an aircraft while pressurized, particularly on the main deck of a 747, results in the particle detector that is triggering is not necessarily representative of the location of the pallet producing the smoke. Furthermore, if the lithium battery 'running away' is located in the middle of a pallet of hundreds of items (rather than on the accessible 'exterior' of the pallet), you're not going to be able to effectively cool it, even if you know EXACTLY where it is and how to cool it.
Check out this FAA video to get a full understanding of the problem, and how to properly fight a thermal runaway. Skip ahead to 6:14 into the video to see why using a Halon fire extinguisher is NOT effective.
Whether a lithium battery issue or something else, we must always hope that something can be gained from the recent tragedies of both UPS and Asiana.
- The way they're packaged (internally within the device), and the amount of them (usually hundreds of these devices on a pallet) make it difficult to identify a thermal runaway issue before it's out of control, especially from the flightdeck.
- Once a thermal runaway occurs, to 'supress' or 'extinguish' the runaway requires cooling the thermal issue, whereas most other on-board fires are controlled by denying oxygen through the use of halon and/or depressurization. Halon and/or depressurization will not effectively suppress a thermal runaway event.
- Because these thermal runaways usually lead to total hull loss, it is impossible to determine EXACTLY where the fire started, only that the lithium batteries where some of the cargo items to burn first. The shipping industry therefore maintains that the batteries are not the ignition source, so the current regulations are satisfactory. This is the issue that 'Jungle' pointed out.
What does this mean for cargo pilots?
If you have a thermal runaway on a pallet, you're not going to be able to control it unless you can recognize it and properly administer to it. A 'particle detector' triggered fire detection system will accurately show there's smoke, but where's the event itself? The nature of air circulation in an aircraft while pressurized, particularly on the main deck of a 747, results in the particle detector that is triggering is not necessarily representative of the location of the pallet producing the smoke. Furthermore, if the lithium battery 'running away' is located in the middle of a pallet of hundreds of items (rather than on the accessible 'exterior' of the pallet), you're not going to be able to effectively cool it, even if you know EXACTLY where it is and how to cool it.
Check out this FAA video to get a full understanding of the problem, and how to properly fight a thermal runaway. Skip ahead to 6:14 into the video to see why using a Halon fire extinguisher is NOT effective.
Whether a lithium battery issue or something else, we must always hope that something can be gained from the recent tragedies of both UPS and Asiana.
In other words, it has their full attention, maybe it won't take another hull/crew loss to make these changes industry wide. Maybe it will.
08-02-2011, 05:11 AM
#39
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,001
Originally Posted by jungle
. . . In other words, it has their full attention, maybe it won't take another hull/crew loss to make these changes industry wide. Maybe it will.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
