Newark777 From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 9348 posts, RR: 30
Reply 1, posted (6 years 1 week 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 5289 times:
Quote: The passengers were able to get back on the plane and resume their travels at 4 o'clock.
So were they allowed to get back on the same plane? Hard to believe if the window was indeed "shattered" as the article said. What's the protocol for flying with a broken window? (And I assume it was only one layer of the window that broke, the passengers probably would have noticed a pressure loss).
OPNLguy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (6 years 1 week 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 5058 times:
Quoting Newark777 (Reply 1): So were they allowed to get back on the same plane? Hard to believe if the window was indeed "shattered" as the article said.
It was undoubtedly "shattered" in the context that vision was no longer possible through it, not "shattered" in the context of Arnold S. shooting out the windshield of that 727 in the movie "Eraser". Windshields are not single-pane, as the movies suggest, but are actually multi-paned, with electrical heating elements in between.
From the article: "shattered side windshield is the only visible damage to this large aircraft"
Presuming the A320 is similar to a 737, that "side" windshield is a sliding window, and easily replaceable. They probably didn't have a spare one in SUX, so it came in (with mechanics) from elsewhere. The forward windshield is the time-consuming one to fix, and also involves curing time for the sealant used.
Crjfixer From United States of America, joined Mar 2008, 172 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (6 years 1 week 23 hours ago) and read 4431 times:
yeah i have never come across a cockpit window/windshield that was quick to replace (not saying that its not possible). There are a bunch of fasteners holding most windshields in and there is usually a very strange torque pattern that must be used to be sure it seats properly. Also you have sealant curetime and pressurization checks that must be done.