Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
FYI; Continental Emergency Landing After Fire  
User currently offlineWidebody From Ireland, joined Aug 2000, 1152 posts, RR: 8
Posted (13 years 6 months 2 weeks 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 2142 times:

Sky News.com

EMERGENCY LANDING AFTER FIRE ON PLANE

....A passenger plane has been forced to make an emergency landing after a fire on board.

The Continental jet had just left Glasgow bound for New York when a warning light an hour into the flight alerted the pilot.

He turned the plane back and landed safely.

A Scottish Airports spokesman said: "The 140 passengers were safely disembarked when the plane landed at Glasgow at 1.45pm and the situation is still being assessed."

The Boeing 757 was the 11.55am Glasgow to Newark service.


19 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineVirginA340 From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 15 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (13 years 6 months 2 weeks 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 2047 times:

Thats great that everyone is safe and ok thanks to a talented flight/cabin crews Is the 757-200 destroyed or still airworthy?


"FUIMUS"
User currently offlineWidebody From Ireland, joined Aug 2000, 1152 posts, RR: 8
Reply 2, posted (13 years 6 months 2 weeks 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 2039 times:

Who knows, it could only have been a fire the size of a match, and if it could fly for an hour back to Glasgow, my guess is that it was still in one piece........!!

User currently offlineLXLGU From South Africa, joined Sep 2000, 1085 posts, RR: 1
Reply 3, posted (13 years 6 months 2 weeks 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 2031 times:

According to Continental the ac involved was
ship 133 and at 1522 British time passengers were
being reallocated to other flights


User currently offlineNKP S2 From United States of America, joined Dec 1999, 1714 posts, RR: 5
Reply 4, posted (13 years 6 months 2 weeks 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 2004 times:

The article was somewhat judgemental IMO. The plane landed because of a fire *warning*, not a fire. As of now it is not yet specified what really happened. False fire / overheat warnings do occur when the detection system malfuctions or there is a duct leak. This is not common to the point of rampancy...but common enough that when there IS a warning, you instinctively know it's probably a false alarm. Of course in this business you error on the side of caution...as it should be. The "fail safe" nature of systems and proceedures worked just as they should.

User currently offlineCdfMXTech From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 1341 posts, RR: 26
Reply 5, posted (13 years 6 months 2 weeks 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 1986 times:

OK ladies in gentlemen of the MEDIA
B4 you jump to anymore conclusions of a fire streaming from the tailpipe of the aircraft and the crew despertaely trying maintain control of the aircraft...
IT WAS AN AFT CARGO FIRE WARNING!!!

Aircraft is still intact and pax uninjured.

Please don't speculate:
*...A passenger plane has been forced to make an emergency landing after a fire on board.




User currently offlineLXLGU From South Africa, joined Sep 2000, 1085 posts, RR: 1
Reply 6, posted (13 years 6 months 2 weeks 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 1975 times:

Latest from Continental-Paxs at Normandy Hotel-
Glasgow and paxs from GLA returned home


User currently offlineWidebody From Ireland, joined Aug 2000, 1152 posts, RR: 8
Reply 7, posted (13 years 6 months 2 weeks 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 1930 times:

Just quoting the article CdfMXTech, send your complaints to Sky News......

Rgds.....


User currently offlineGKirk From UK - Scotland, joined Jun 2000, 24936 posts, RR: 56
Reply 8, posted (13 years 6 months 2 weeks 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 1897 times:

So will CO send a larger a/c tommorrow to take todays pax and tommorrws pax? DC10 or 777 perhaps?


When you hear the noise of the Tartan Army Boys, we'll be coming down the road!
User currently offlineG-BEAK From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2000, 168 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (13 years 6 months 2 weeks 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 1886 times:

The Normandy is actually in Renfrew and is on the flightpath right at the end of the runway.

User currently offlineScotty From UK - Scotland, joined Dec 1999, 1875 posts, RR: 3
Reply 10, posted (13 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 1857 times:

GLA fire services reported smoke in the cargo hold. The field was closed for approx 30 mins and a full emergency procedure was out in place. Whilst in the air, another aircraft (Alitalia possibly) was asked to go close and look for smoke. Very technical eh?

User currently offlineGKirk From UK - Scotland, joined Jun 2000, 24936 posts, RR: 56
Reply 11, posted (13 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 1806 times:

Ignore my comment from before. Im sure that the 757 will be able to return to EWR with the pax. The other a/c was an Italian Air Force Hercules? Also was an RAF Nimrod and a Royal Navy Sea King Helicopter.


When you hear the noise of the Tartan Army Boys, we'll be coming down the road!
User currently offlineSashA From Russia, joined May 1999, 861 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (13 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 1793 times:

Will the B757 be able to take all pax from yesterday and today, or will there be another CO B757?


An2/24/28,Yak42,Tu154/134,IL18/62/96,B737/757/767,A310/320/319,F100,BAe146,EMB-145,CRJ,A340-600,B747-400,A-330-300,A-340
User currently offlineScotty From UK - Scotland, joined Dec 1999, 1875 posts, RR: 3
Reply 13, posted (13 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 1784 times:

The "chase plane" was an Italian A/F G222

Scotty


User currently offlineAlpha 1 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (13 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 1777 times:

The media has become as sensational in reporting things that the National Enquirer ought to be considered a legitimate news source any more.

A few months ago an AirTran DC9 going ATL-CAK had to return to ATL with smoke in the cabin. Well, naturally, one of the reporters for the FOX affilliate in CLE said that everyone survived the "crash". Amazing...the anchor tells the listeners it did an air return, but the stupid reporter calls it a "crash". I don't think that was just a slip of the tongue-it was designed to sensationalize the story.


User currently offlineTwotterwrench From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (13 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 1776 times:

Amazing.... because it was Continental that this happened to, you all jump up to defend the crew and hail them heroes. If this had been AirTran, you would have lined up to be the first to crucify them. Such a naughty double standard.

User currently offlineAlpha 1 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 16, posted (13 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 1767 times:

Speaking of jumping to conclusions. How do you know anyone here would have immediately condemend the crew if it had been AirTran? I think most people would have complimented the crew of whichever carrier would be involved in something like this. It shows a lot of skill and nerve to safely land when there's a potential problem like this. Don't be so quick to condemn the folks here.

User currently offlineG-BEAK From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2000, 168 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (13 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day ago) and read 1754 times:

Todays 757 operated as normal and a 764 came up from LGW this afternoon. Not sure if yesterdays 757 gone yet or if its still here. Those 764 wings are great.


Click for large version
Click here for full size photo!

Photo © Thomas Millard




Click for large version
Click here for full size photo!

Photo © Joe Pries



User currently offlineTwotterwrench From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (13 years 6 months 2 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 1730 times:

I only say what I said because it seems that everytime AirTran has the slightest little incident, you can hardly get a word in edgewise through those who are screaming about shutting them down. That's all....

User currently offlineContinentalEWR From United States of America, joined May 2000, 3762 posts, RR: 13
Reply 19, posted (13 years 6 months 2 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 1727 times:

There's a difference between Air Tran and CO though. Air Tran has a bad safety record and frequent mishaps
but I believe that Air Tran is probably the most closely
watched US carrier as a result of its reputation.

ContinentalEWR


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...
Delta Emergency Landing/engine Fire Last Night? posted Tue Aug 24 2004 16:16:28 by Capicuuu
Continental Emergency Landing At LAX? posted Thu Jun 24 2004 20:45:22 by Drerx7
Continental Emergency Landing: RDU posted Thu Jan 15 2004 18:51:32 by Akjetblue
Pakistan Intl A310 Emergency Landing (cabin Fire) posted Wed Aug 20 2003 21:03:31 by DLH404
Continental : Emergency Landing posted Thu Mar 18 1999 04:38:53 by MD11
Gulf Air Emergency Landing Due To Fire posted Mon Oct 16 2006 10:07:52 by QatarA340
Continental Express Making Emergency Landing posted Tue May 2 2006 23:59:22 by Vanguard737
Continental Express Emergency Landing In EWR posted Thu Mar 23 2006 14:25:05 by InTheSky74
Aircraft Lands Safe In BAQ After Emergency Landing posted Wed Jan 25 2006 06:04:51 by MATURRO727
Continental Flight 744 Emergency Landing At Kiah posted Fri Jul 1 2005 21:45:26 by Wdleiser