Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
NW DC-10 Diverts For Suspected Cargo Fire..  
User currently offlineRadelow From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 426 posts, RR: 3
Posted (10 years 3 weeks 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 4556 times:

Looks like it turned out to be a false alarm but still... Cargo fire is a scary thing! Heck, any fire on a plane is a scary thing.

From the Glasgow Evening Times

Meanwhile, airline passengers were today involved in a mid-air fire scare when their London-bound aircraft developed problems over the Atlantic.
The Northwest DC 10 jet, with 280 people on board, was forced to divert to Prestwick Airport for a full emergency landing when smoke was detected in the hold.
Emergency services were put on alert at the Ayrshire airport around 8am when the captain decided to bring the aircraft into land.
The Northwest Airlines jet had set off from Minneapolis, Minnesota, bound for Gatwick and was heading over the Atlantic when a light came on the in the cockpit.
A spokesman for Prestwick Airport said: "The plane was diverted to Prestwick which has the capacity for a plane of that size to land.
"When it touched down on the tarmac it was discovered that there had been a false alarm.
"Passengers remained on the aircraft and, following checks, it flew off three hours later."
Strathclyde Fire Brigade sent four appliances to the scene and were on stand-by until the plane landed safely.

23 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineN808NW From United States of America, joined Aug 2004, 374 posts, RR: 4
Reply 1, posted (10 years 3 weeks 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 4469 times:

Dose any one know the aircraft reg. and where did you hear this. I checked NW's flight status and it dose say NW44 was diverted to Prestwick this morning...... and here comes the NW DC-10s are to old threads in..... 5...4...3...2...1.  Wink/being sarcastic

-Jason



All flights have great IFE...get yourself a window seat, thats something no PTV can beat! flew 808 Pacific an Atlanic
User currently offlineJasper711 From Australia, joined Jun 2004, 19 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (10 years 3 weeks 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 4186 times:

NW DC 10's are too old! I didn't want to disappoint you N808NW.

If they are certified to fly, are able to take off and land then let them fly. Whilst I personally avoid them wherever possible (my only experience on a DC 10 was awful) I am sure there are aircraft flying, cars that are being driven and shipping vessels carrying passengers that are in a lot worse shape than the NW DC-10's.



User currently offlineCospn From Northern Mariana Islands, joined Oct 2001, 1621 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (10 years 3 weeks 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 4123 times:

This shows the Usefullness of PIK for a Emergency landing with the massive traffic bound to the UK Europe

User currently offlineN229NW From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 1954 posts, RR: 32
Reply 4, posted (10 years 3 weeks 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 3936 times:

Interesting...This hasn't showed up in the FAA sdrs yet, but I did notice that the same problem (false alarms in the cargo hold fire detectors) has occured twice, in May and June of this year, on two different NW DC-10s (N211NW and N243NW), and both times the flights were diverted (one to Iceland, one to Montana)...Maybe it's time they replaced all the fire detectors!


It's people like you what cause unrest!
User currently offlineN229NW From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 1954 posts, RR: 32
Reply 5, posted (10 years 3 weeks 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 3933 times:

Interesting...This hasn't showed up in the FAA sdrs yet, but I did notice that the same problem (false alarms in the cargo hold fire detectors) has occured twice, in May and June of this year, on two different NW DC-10s (N211NW and N243NW), and both times the flights were diverted (one to Iceland, one to Montana)...Maybe it's time they replaced all the fire detectors!


It's people like you what cause unrest!
User currently offlineBIGBlack From United States of America, joined Aug 2004, 600 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (10 years 3 weeks 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 3931 times:

My uncle fears and dislikes the DC-10 so much, you can't get him on one


Someone special in the air
User currently offlineN808NW From United States of America, joined Aug 2004, 374 posts, RR: 4
Reply 7, posted (10 years 3 weeks 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 3888 times:

Yeah, OK, the DC-10s are old. Its just that their classics; a relic of the modern jet age revolution (about 1960-1970).

I would choose a NW A330 over a NW DC-10, if any of you were wondering about that.

Another thing about the DC-10 is that coincidently they've often been delayed due to mx problems when someone I know was on one; including today. NW55 AMS-MSP. "my mom's freind"

-Jason



All flights have great IFE...get yourself a window seat, thats something no PTV can beat! flew 808 Pacific an Atlanic
User currently offlineBIGBlack From United States of America, joined Aug 2004, 600 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (10 years 3 weeks 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 3871 times:

Relics and classic are terrific things....

but I'll take a A330 with a side of modernness please



Someone special in the air
User currently offlineN229NW From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 1954 posts, RR: 32
Reply 9, posted (10 years 3 weeks 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 3751 times:

No way, man! Don't get me wrong, nothing against new planes: the 777 especially is a beautiful bird, probably one of the most awesome planes ever built. But there's something noble about a machine that has been faithfully serving for so long, and I'd give up my personal video screen now and then for a chance to fly in one of these...

That said, I still think they might want to take a look at those smoke detectors on all their DC-10s before this happens again...



It's people like you what cause unrest!
User currently offlineRadelow From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 426 posts, RR: 3
Reply 10, posted (10 years 3 weeks 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 3706 times:

Of all the classic's, the DC-10 is the one I dislike the most. In fact I am not a big fan of the MD-11 as well. 3 of my flights on DC-10's (which maybe numbers a total of 10-15 flights) resulted in delays because of aircraft problems. That does not necessarily reflect on the plane but it just gives me the willies. I basically will not, if I have the choice, fly on a DC-10 or MD-11. I don't find them particularly comfortable either.

Now the 737-200 or 727...Now those are some awesome planes to fly on.

Mark


User currently offlineN229NW From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 1954 posts, RR: 32
Reply 11, posted (10 years 3 weeks 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 3699 times:

I've had great flights in DC-10s (which look fantastic in the NW bowling shoe livery), and never any mechanical problems, though it has been a while since I was on one (I think since AA stopped using them for coast-to-coast service). I always found them much more comfortable than L-1011's for some reason. I think it may be because back when I was taking L-1011s, it was usually TWA or Eastern, and both of those airlines (in _MY_ experience, I add, though I'll probably still get some angry comments about this) were not so hot. Seemed that 2/3 of all the long-haul TWA flights I took (and it used to be a lot) were delayed for mechanical problems, and with Eastern I think I took L-1011s about 3 times and (coincidence?) the lavatories were utterly disgusting each time: half of them out of order and the other half almost too smelly to use even right after takeoff...


It's people like you what cause unrest!
User currently offlineAzjubilee From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 3942 posts, RR: 28
Reply 12, posted (10 years 3 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 3604 times:

Gimme a break people... the DC10 age and mx correlation is GETTING OLD!!! I just flew on a relatively NEW Delta 764 and we were almost 2 hours late because of a MECHANICAL problem. Should 764s flown by DL be considered old and unsafe now? Some of you need to do some research... several DC10s are the newest DC10s in the world, having been rolled off the line in the late 80s. That makes them NEWER than many 757s and 767s flying around.


AZJ


User currently offlineN808NW From United States of America, joined Aug 2004, 374 posts, RR: 4
Reply 13, posted (10 years 3 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 3513 times:

Mx problems on new aircraft are usually creature comfort things, like a broken seat or TV malfunctions ect. On old planes it can be more of a serious malfunction, like problems with gauges, lights, aircraft systems, and even the engines.


All flights have great IFE...get yourself a window seat, thats something no PTV can beat! flew 808 Pacific an Atlanic
User currently offlineConcordeBoy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (10 years 3 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 3488 times:

While this obviously is no ETOPS-certified aircraft...

...does anyone know if NW ops them with fire suppression in the cargo holds?


User currently offlineAzjubilee From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 3942 posts, RR: 28
Reply 15, posted (10 years 3 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 3486 times:

My delay was with an electrical problem. Hardly a creature comfort issue. I've had non creature comfort delay issues with new planes at NWA and other airlines. There very little merrit to old planes equaling more delays.



AZJ


User currently offlineWingnutMN From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 644 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (10 years 3 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 3480 times:

I'm just curious about the number of people on board. That plane can only hold 268 people (I think). It must have been a full plane and crew maybe? that would get that number up over 280.

WingnutMN



Any landing you can walk away from is a good landing! It's a bonus if you can fly the plane again!!
User currently offlineAzjubilee From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 3942 posts, RR: 28
Reply 17, posted (10 years 3 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 3471 times:

The DC10s have 273 seats... so will full pax load and crew it will equal about 280.

It is a requirement for all A/C to have fire supression systems in the cargo bins. This is a result of the Valujet disaster in FL.



AZJ


User currently offlineN243NW From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 1632 posts, RR: 20
Reply 18, posted (10 years 3 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 3403 times:

Interesting...This hasn't showed up in the FAA sdrs yet, but I did notice that the same problem (false alarms in the cargo hold fire detectors) has occured twice, in May and June of this year, on two different NW DC-10s (N211NW and N243NW), and both times the flights were diverted (one to Iceland, one to Montana)...Maybe it's time they replaced all the fire detectors!

Arrrrgggghhhhh! My baby's been having false alarms!  Sad Interesting...never heard about these two incidents before.

Any word on the reg? Hope it's not 1243 again!

BTW, nice screen name, N229NW! Welcome to the forums! Big thumbs up

-N243NW  Smile/happy/getting dizzy

[Edited 2004-09-10 05:02:53]


B-52s don't take off. They scare the ground away.
User currently offlineN229NW From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 1954 posts, RR: 32
Reply 19, posted (10 years 3 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 3313 times:

Thanks for the welcome, N243NW!  Smile/happy/getting dizzy

I still don't see an official report on this posted with a reg #... how long do things typically take to appear in the FAA data?



It's people like you what cause unrest!
User currently offlineBrons2 From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 3015 posts, RR: 4
Reply 20, posted (10 years 3 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 3247 times:

I flew on 1242 last week, MEM-AMS.

No problems. Nice plane.

I'd fly the DC-10 again.



Firings, if well done, are good for employee morale.
User currently offlineSa365c1 From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2001, 131 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (10 years 3 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 3199 times:

Hi

I work at Prestwick it taxied past me after it landed reg was N228NW

Regards


User currently offlineN229NW From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 1954 posts, RR: 32
Reply 22, posted (10 years 3 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 3108 times:

Hi Sa265c1,

Thanks, but I am pretty sure that N228NW was retired and I think by now even scrapped! (Certainly the reg number is not active in the FAA data, and the aircraft was reregistered as N228PR for scrapping) Mystery...

[Edited 2004-09-11 06:22:27]


It's people like you what cause unrest!
User currently offlineSa365c1 From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2001, 131 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (10 years 3 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 3060 times:

sorry that was a typo meant to say N238NW

Regards


Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
NW DC-10 Returns To AMS For ''security Reasons'' posted Wed Aug 23 2006 12:46:10 by Airbuseric
NW DC-10 To MBJ For Princess posted Mon Mar 27 2006 15:29:03 by Bobnwa
NW DC-10 Engine Fire @ NRT posted Wed Nov 24 2004 03:17:26 by AMS
NW DC-10 To PHX. posted Sat Nov 18 2006 18:17:21 by USAF757300
Retired Nw Dc-10's? posted Thu Nov 9 2006 04:24:26 by Almbluzman
NW DC-10 Flight Crews posted Tue Sep 5 2006 04:26:38 by Fvyfireman
NW DC-10 Last Flight Question posted Tue Sep 5 2006 02:31:26 by B6FA4ever
NW DC-10'S@ LGW posted Sun Jul 16 2006 01:51:27 by Monkeyboi
Last NW DC-10 Flight On 1-7-07 Now? posted Fri Jul 7 2006 21:29:56 by Kdtwflyer
787 As A DC-10 Replacement For Worlds Airways posted Fri Jun 23 2006 20:59:40 by 747400sp