Five passengers were treated at John Wayne Airport this morning and a sixth was taken to a hospital after a Southwest Airlines 737 jet filled with smoke and was forced to make an emergency landing, officials said.
Flight 506 had taken off from John Wayne Airport bound for Oakland with 108 passengers and five crew members aboard. But the jetliner turned around about three miles out after the pilot reported that he had smoke in the cabin.
It touched down at 8:24 a.m., pulled to the gate, and the plane was evacuated.
Officials said the smoke was generated by a leak.
Local authorities said an auxiliary power unit leaked fluid onto a hot piece of machinery, and the pilot reported having smoke in the cockpit.
Southwest Airlines spokeswoman Whitney Eichinger said a ventilation unit leaked fluid onto an engine, pumping smoke into the cabin.
Paramedics treated five passengers at the scene, and one woman in her 60s was transported to Anaheim Memorial Hospital. Orange County Fire Authority spokesman Steve Miller said the woman was not badly hurt, but was taken to the hospital as a precaution.
Ann McCarley, a spokeswoman for John Wayne Airport, said the incident would be investigated by the National Transportation Safety Board.
"We’re thankful we’re down safe," said Janie Merkle, 42, of Irvine, one of the passengers. "We had just taken off, just over the ocean when we saw smoke coming from the cockpit. We smelled fumes. The flight attendants told us that the pilot knew what was happening and he was handling it."
A man she identified as the pilot addressed passengers as she was being interviewed on her cell phone.
"I had my hands full but I told the flight attendants we weren’t burning but to prepare for the emergency landing," the pilot could be heard telling passengers. "We landed backwards (approaching from the ocean). We went up and came right back without going around."
Eichinger said all the passengers but the woman taken to the hospital boarded another plane and continued their trip to Oakland.
"My husband and I are going for a little business and a little pleasure," Merkle said before reboarding. "He has some business and then we’ll go spend time in the wine country. That was some flight; I was really shook up."
Flyingbronco05 From United States, joined May 2002, 3783 posts, RR: 4 Reply 1, posted (6 years 3 months 3 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 1371 times:
It touched down at 8:24 a.m., pulled to the gate, and the plane was evacuated.
I dont like going against pilots, but come on!!
You got smoke in the cabin and cockpit. Don't taxi to the gate. Pull off the runway then evacuate.
I am glad that everybody seems to be ok or will be ok.
WNfan From United States, joined Jul 2003, 203 posts, RR: 0 Reply 2, posted (6 years 3 months 3 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 1344 times:
I've heard that using the slides over the wings can be rather dangerous to passengers -- perhaps going to the gate was indeed safer. And perhaps the smoke level had dissipated on returning to SNA.
Strickerje From United States, joined Feb 2001, 723 posts, RR: 3 Reply 3, posted (6 years 3 months 3 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 1304 times:
Normally I'd say you're right, but this isn't such a big airport that taxiing takes half an hour. Remember that he turned around and landed from the ocean on the runway end opposite the terminal. So when he got to the other end of the runway (I'm assuming he used most of the runway since they usually do), he would have already been right at the building anyway.
Anyway, it's good to hear that everyone escaped unharmed and there was no actual fire.
Sir, what if everyone in the world suddenly asked me for a free upgrade on this flight?
Chgoan From United States, joined Aug 2003, 230 posts, RR: 1 Reply 4, posted (6 years 3 months 3 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 1265 times:
But even if he stopped right by the terminal, I don't think it would be a good idea to pull a potenially "hot" smoking plane up to a terminal building near other planes and fuel. That sounds risky.....and could be disasterous since they might not have known what was causing the smoke. Better off pulling up stairs out at the end of the runway or something.
PROSA From United States, joined Oct 2001, 5288 posts, RR: 7 Reply 5, posted (6 years 3 months 3 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 1151 times:
I'm surprised that the A/C returned to SNA with its short runways. Isn't it normal practice to use longer runways in an emergency of any type? LGB would have been reasonably nearby.
SLCPilot From United States, joined Aug 2003, 373 posts, RR: 3 Reply 6, posted (6 years 3 months 3 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 1123 times:
I usually give the PIC a fair amount of trust when it comes to situations like this. Sure, hindsight is usually 20/20, but how can we judge the situation with the amount of information we have? We can't!
We could sit here and think of plenty of situations where PICs have made poor decisions in like situations (remember an L-1011 in Saudi Arabia?), but it's all just armchair quarterbacking unless we have the facts.
I remember a friend judging a videotape of a base-final turn I made in a C-172, saying it was WAAYY too high. What he couldn't see was the 25 kt wind, and the fact that I would have barely made the runway in the given conditions with the power all the way off...
It's usually better not to speak in absolutes and be too quick to judge....
SLCPilot
I don't like to be fueled by anger, I don't like to be fooled by lust...
Capt078 From United States, joined Jul 2003, 421 posts, RR: 3 Reply 7, posted (6 years 3 months 3 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 1102 times:
i'm not a commercial pilot, so my comments are only speculation. given recent catastrophic events involving smoke on airplanes leading to crashes (ie, valujet and swissair), i believe that the pilots wanted to get the plane down as soon as possible. three miles from an airport (i would think) is close enough to convince the pilots to return there. as evidence, the pilots did not even follow a pattern into a headwind landing. that tells me it was more important to get the plane on the ground than anything else.
AA737-823 From United States, joined Mar 2000, 4041 posts, RR: 10 Reply 8, posted (6 years 3 months 3 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 1045 times:
As we all know, where there is smoke there is not necessarily fire. The pilot knew this- evidence by the news report. People ALWAYS get injured in an evacuation. I think it was a good decision on the pilot's part to go to the gate.
R
For unto us a Child is born- unto us a Son is given!
AA777MIA From United States, joined Aug 2003, 686 posts, RR: 5 Reply 9, posted (6 years 3 months 3 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 988 times:
The pilot was right in what he did, he did not have an actual fire, and I am sure when they landed CFR was looking. More passengers are injured going down the slides, than if they are evacuated into a terminal or on a ramp stand... I think that his was right on track....
Bwimom From United States, joined Jul 2003, 2 posts, RR: 0 Reply 11, posted (6 years 3 months 3 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 750 times:
Did this story make national news? or perhaps because of the "real" national crisis yesterday, it was overlooked. Anyway, as a member of the Southwest family, I am very proud to read of how this crew handled this situation. I have always, and continue to feel completely safe while in the hands of any Southwest pilots! Thanks to them all....
Barney captain From United States, joined Nov 2001, 552 posts, RR: 17 Reply 13, posted (6 years 3 months 3 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 499 times:
We use 'Bleeds Off" take-off procedures out of SNA due to the noise abatement. In a nut shell, we use the APU (pictured), to provide cabin aircond/press to allow the engines maximum take-off thrust. While I wouldn't say it's common, APU's have been known to blow a seal which allows small amounts of oil (but creating LOTS of smoke) to enter the cabin through the A/C system. Not really a DIRE emergency b/c it's not fire, but certainly worth doing exactly what the crew did and get her back on terra firma asap. IMO, an emergency evac (remember, there is no fire, it simply is the Boeing equivalent of a 57' Chevy with bad rings) would not be warranted. We landed shortly after these guys, Job well done Gentlemen.
CPH-R From Denmark, joined May 2001, 4910 posts, RR: 6 Reply 14, posted (6 years 3 months 3 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 440 times:
Cancidas,
a Swissair MD-11, flight 101 I think it was, crashed near Newfoundland due to smoke in the cockpit. I have been told that it was due to CRM breakdown - but as usual I'm wrong
FLYSSC From Lebanon, joined Aug 2003, 6340 posts, RR: 64 Reply 15, posted (6 years 3 months 3 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 412 times:
If your plane is filled with smoke, 1 : you land ASAP 2 : you evacuate the plane if you are not dead !
All the pilot know that. Don't waste time thinking how long is taxiing..bla bla bla.. smoke can kill you in 5 seconds, and it's better to have a few PAX with minor injuries during an emergency evacuation than having 108 people dead, well fastened in their seat.
I they decided to go to the gate, the origin of the smoke was probably identified, and was not that thick anymore while on the ground...if not, they took a very very vrey risky decision, but I doubt !
Buckfifty From Canada, joined Oct 2001, 1283 posts, RR: 30 Reply 16, posted (6 years 3 months 3 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 401 times:
Cancidas,
a Swissair MD-11, flight 101 I think it was, crashed near Newfoundland due to lack of CRM (The PIC wanted to do the checklists while the copilot wanted to get the aircraft on ground ASAP).
I urge you to read the final report on this matter before making blanket statements like this one in regards to the Swissair tragedy.
And on the matter of the WN incident, I think the pilots putting the plane back on the ground is a good job in itself, especially with smoke in the cockpit.
I think Barney Captain explained it all rather well...
Sponsor Message: 
From United States, joined Nov 1999, 9502 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From Poland, joined Jul 2003, 4112 posts, 
From Denmark, joined May 2001, 4910 posts, 
From Lebanon, joined Aug 2003, 6340 posts, 
From Canada, joined Oct 2001, 1283 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
