Musapapaya From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2004, 1028 posts, RR: 0 Posted (7 years 7 months 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 4497 times:
CX255 departing HKG on 9th May was forced to return back to HKG after the a/c broken down. It was 2.5 hours in flight when the captain made the decision.
The local news in HK says that the a/c was not working well before take off and that passengers were complaning about this situation. Some passengers were reported to be sick.
I wonder why the captain decided to take off if the situation was known before that. Why not just find a replacement aircraft or something? The passengers were later put on another aircraft and departed 9 hours after schedule.
TK787 From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 4268 posts, RR: 13 Reply 1, posted (7 years 7 months 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 4472 times:
4 years ago, on a flight from San Jose, Costa Rica an AA757 had the same problem while still on the ground, but the captain apologized and we continued on, it was a very uncomfortable flight. Good thing nobody got sick.
CX flyboy From Hong Kong, joined Dec 1999, 6450 posts, RR: 56 Reply 4, posted (7 years 7 months 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 4176 times:
Temperatures reached 40 degrees celcius, so anything other than a turnback was impossible. However it is not uncommon for a 744 to have a warm cabin on the ground because the APU is not good enough to cool the cabin in the tropical heat. After departure it became evident that one pack which had supposedly been locked out had not been done properly, and the captain in conjunction with engineering started to trouble shoot to see if they could fix the problem. After a while they decided the best thing would be to return which they did.
Musapapaya, please do not think that the crew were happily just sitting there for 2.5 hours before they suddenly noticed that it was warm and decided to turn back. This is not the case, and no-one knew before departure that the aircraft had this problem. No-one would willingly take an aircraft into the air with this fault.
Singapore_Air From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2000, 13722 posts, RR: 20 Reply 6, posted (7 years 7 months 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 3971 times:
Excerpts from the South China Morning Post - 11 May 2006:
"There was hot air coming out of the vents," she said. "The captain announced that it might be because the engine was off and that it should cool down once we were up in the air."
The plane, carrying 222 passengers, took off 22 minutes late.
"After two hours in the air, I felt really claustrophobic and had an anxiety attack. I told my husband I felt like I couldn't breathe," frequent flier Mrs Hira said. "An air hostess noticed and they were fanning me, getting me napkins with ice every 10 to 15 minutes to calm me down.
"My driver in economy class told me the situation was even worse there, with at least two people lying down in the walkway."
A Cathay Pacific spokeswoman said a valve in one of the plane's air-conditioning systems was faulty.
However, Mrs Hira asked why passengers were made to put up with such difficult conditions for four hours when the problem was apparent from the outset.
"If your parts are faulty, you should not take off to begin with. If they thought it would get better but it didn't, it shouldn't have taken them so long to decide to turn around - it was a 12-hour flight."
Musapapaya From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2004, 1028 posts, RR: 0 Reply 7, posted (7 years 7 months 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 3794 times:
Quoting Singapore_Air (Reply 6): "If your parts are faulty, you should not take off to begin with. If they thought it would get better but it didn't, it shouldn't have taken them so long to decide to turn around - it was a 12-hour flight."
Hi Singapore Air
I have to second this. They should have known that one of the pack was not working properly. This is quite a shame how CX handles this case.
CX flyboy From Hong Kong, joined Dec 1999, 6450 posts, RR: 56 Reply 8, posted (7 years 7 months 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 3572 times:
Actually, having one pack unserviceable is not a big problem. You just shut it off and rely on the other two. Aircraft often depart with unserviceabilities. Redundancy is built into aircraft so this sort of thing does not ground an aircraft and disrupt operations.
They knew the pack was unserviceable. It was shut off and written in the tech log. No problems there.
CX flyboy From Hong Kong, joined Dec 1999, 6450 posts, RR: 56 Reply 10, posted (7 years 7 months 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 3380 times:
The problem was that the pack was not isolated properly, and a valve which runs hot air from the engine was not closed and ran very hot air into the cabin. This the crew did not know about until its effects started showing.
Red Panda From Hong Kong, joined Jun 2000, 1521 posts, RR: 0 Reply 13, posted (7 years 7 months 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 2937 times:
In many cases, being too hot on ground is not a problem. This is probably the APU is not working. As CX flyboy says, many unserviceables are Acceptable Deferred Defects that can be fixed later on. However, as a crew member, we would rather to have these problems fixed for our convenience.
Regarding the above case in particular, I am sorry I know nothing about it.
Musapapaya From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2004, 1028 posts, RR: 0 Reply 14, posted (7 years 7 months 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 2928 times:
Oh yes this reminds me of a trip from HKG - LHR last september.
We boarded the BA 747 and the captain also annouced that due to some reasons the aircon was not working on the ground, the situation improved when we took off.
Why would the APU be not working? Does that mean it is broken down or just the captain did not turn it on?