Have a 2nd cousin that timed up his retirement well leaving after 35 years at AA right now all you get to fly are desks on the ground with all cancelled flights out there
@@ChannelJanis .. That was exactly my though. If you suspect a fire you land ASAP, and if you confirm an uncontrollable fire on board you even need to consider an off-field landing. Cargo fires have downed planes in 15 minutes from first indication to crash. And having Li batteries on board certainly does not help. I understand that you need to balance risk so if you don't have an uncontrollable fire confirmed you probably will not ditch in the ocean just in case, but you have a perfectly good airport with a long runway in Havana that was right below you. How long did it take from declaring emergency to Havana to landing in MIA? There is a good chance that they would have died if they had a real fire, and there is nowhere to land between Havana and Miami.
I spent about 2 minutes of that clip wondering why the yellow plane in the bottom right was never moving until I realized it's the channel's logo fml xD
I spent a few minutes yesterday looking for my phone. It was in my hand. I actually put it down to look under something for my phone. Perhaps the neural net will make phones obsolete.
@@andytaylor1588 ... and then you get bombarded with spam and never mind the malware --- we actually have a pretty bad human malware going around the last half year or so, now imagine it came into your neural network ... from the other side of the world ... Fun times!
Prime example of the importance of good documentation. ATC asked the crew immediately if any dangerous goods are loaded, and the captain just needed to look onto (or even remembered) the NOTOC (Notification To Captain), which summarizes all dangerous goods loaded, with their respective loading position, quantity and possible dangers. Both the head loader and the Captain has to sign the NOTOC pre-flight. He immediately reported, that he has lithium batteries loaded, which are by the way not banned, like some other comments said, they are (in larger quantities/as cargo) classified as CAO load (Cargo Aircraft Only). You can hear how nervous the crew was (I would be sh***ng bricks too with a fire indication and Lithium loaded). And the need for the 360° on the approach probably made them even more nervous, because it meant more time in the air (which probably resulted in that low altitude of about 700ft)... But they did the right descision with that - we all know by recent events what coming in too high and too fast can lead to... All in all, a good representation of good airmenship by ATC and Crew. Probably the crews most stressful minutes in their lifes to day...
@@colinsmith1412 They didn't do everything perfect, they clearly were nervous and got too low on their 360° circle. But the crew thought that they were too high on the approach (while also keeping in mind being above MLAW -> overweight) and made the descision to circle and lose some energy before landing. The accident in Pakistan a few months ago showed the dangers of landing with too much energy, so in my (lay/avgeek) opinion, they did the right choice. The other choise would have been too eventually go around and the need to re-establish on the approach, which probably would have taken even more time. In the end - everything comes down to human factor, a (unclear/unconfirmed) cargo fire with Lithium loaded is probably the crew's worst nightmare. And if you try to look out of their perspective, probably thinking that at every second that whole fuselage behind them could light up like a candle, which would be a (almost) guaranteed total loss for both aircraft and crew (and possibly people on ground below) - I really don't want to ever be in the stress situation that they had to endure....
Aviate - Navigate - Communicate. In that order, highest to lowest priority. The crew clearly was under high stress and got too low on the 360° circle, but as soon as they got their aircraft under control (aviate) and got their bearings (navigate) they started to talk to ATC again (communicate). Pretty much text book - but yeah, that air traffic controller probably had a little sweat going...
Was thinking that too, when an emergency plane suddenly goes to radio silence. Especially when it’s accompanied by a low altitude alert. And for those pilots too, flying the plane while not knowing whether or not it is burning up behind them. Great job by everybody.
@@oldguydoesstuff120 yeah but at 6:29 isnt that solid white line where the coastline is? running north to south further to the east of where they were?
@@andyasdf2078 On closer inspection, it does look like they started the 360 over the city of Miami, with the southward part of the loop over Biscayne Bay. So yes, that jagged line is the coastline. Still, the whole of southern Florida is barely above sea level. The airport is at about 10 feet. Yes, descending from 700 feet is problematic, but rising terrain is not an issue. I would suspect some people in taller buildings got a bit uncomfortable, though.
@@oldguydoesstuff120 they then fairly rapidly climbed back up to 1600ft.. part of me is thinking maybe the altitude alert by atc actually prevented them from blindly descending into the ground i know it was 'just' a cargo flight but this isnt brilliant to be honest
"Pilot does not respond" is going to replace "The call is coming from inside the house" in my nightmares... Also, after asking a zillion times not to be blocked, how did that SUV end up blocking them at the end of the runway? Mad!
I think they were going to make sure they weren't on fire before they let them keep going. And the pilot said "We want to keep going IF we're not on fire".
@@yourhandlehere1 Possibly... However, it looks like there may be terrain markings on the map. Anyone know if there are tall hills or minor peaks around Miami? They could've lost sight of terrain due to weather and needed to correct for it (the kind of thing you ignore the radio while doing). I did notice the plane go 'MIA' status around 1400' near those markings on the map.
@@hauntedshadowslegacy2826 As a Florida native this question made me laugh. A lot. Miami's elevation is barely above sea level. The highest elevation in Florida is less than 350ft and its basically in Georgia.
Well if you have the right mentality for it, the best way to stay calm in a situation like that would be "Well, there is nothing i can do about it besides what im doing right now.. so either it goes well or it does not" Probably also helped that it was just indication and no smoke in the cockpit.
Yep I can see that, However pilots don’t fly by emotion. They fly by facts. There isn’t much point in getting worked up about things as it will only make the situation worse! They are trained to stay calm and handle it in a professional manner.
A lot of people have to stay cool and calm under enormous stress. Pilots, astronauts, deep sea or cave divers, ... Italian astronaut Luca Parmitano for example nearly drowned (yes, you read that right, drowned, in water) during a space walk in 2013. Keeping his cool and using what he had, he made his way back to the airlock ... and lived. Panic would have been rather detrimental to his survival. But it can be anyone, anywhere. You drive on the highway at a nice clip and suddenly a wheel blows out. OK, you need to slow down carefully and only gentle steering, and bring the car to a stop on the hard shoulder. Easy (or complicated) as that.
That was a well handled emergency by both the crew and the approach controller. That pilot was cool and calm on the radio for someone in a potential burning plane! You could hear the relief when they confirmed no fire and no heat on the doors tho... could hear him smiling.
Great visuals on this video, and glad everyone got down safely. I could sense the understandable tension from the crew but they and the ATC did a great job.
You could not tell if the Captain was watering his flowers or in a emergency flying death trap on fire. Cool and calm.You want this Captain for your plane.
I know the visualization is a recreation and may not be exactly accurate or to scale but Yukon 860 said multiple times what they intended to do, pull clear of the runway. Despite that they were blocked by the van?
Possibility #1: The fire was real, the plane was going to burn up and the white van blocking them wouldn't change anything. Possibility #2: There was no fire, the white van moves and they can taxi.
they can evacuate anywhre they want. Thing is ARFF vehicles take care not only care of the aircraft but of all of the buildings and people at the airport. If there is no fire, they're good to wait or evacuate if pilots think it's safer. If there is fire, the airplane must stop and remain clear of buildings and far from people --> evacuate on the runway. That is the procedure for a [possible] fire.
My teacher once told me she flew from Morocco to France, but during the Flight some idiot didn't extinguish his cigarette so when the cigarette ended in the trashcan of the airplane the whole passenger cabin was filled with smoke so they dumped fuel close to Spain and made a emergency landing in Spain, i think that was the reason that they started banning smoking in airplanes
I notice in nearly every emergency recording how bad the coordination and communication between the controllers must be. In nearly every video as in this one the pilots had to repeat fuel remaining, reason for emergency, POB etc multiple times to different controllers. Double checking is fine and important but I always have the impression that the next controller the aircraft is talking to has no idea what is going on. I think it should go without saying that the controller who picks up the emergency passes ALL information to next one and so on until the aerodrome (and maybe the company) is informed aswell
@@gronki1 Eventough this aircraft surely flew 30 mins or more back from Cuba to Miami the information should be transferred nearly instantly through the ATC facilities. As an ATCO myself I can tell you have two options: Getting information directly by your colleague or hear into the frequency that is dealing with the EMERG and get the information yourself.
Seems like a visible light or even thermal CCTV in the cargo hold would provide more confident assessment of things like this. Any reason for them to not to descend faster in the way back? To avoid having to do the 360? I guess their groundspeed might have been lower.
I disagree. I feel like the flight sim segments make the whole event feel more "real," in spite of the relatively poor graphics and whatnot. Like the old saying goes, "seeing is believing," I feel like the flight sim segments help remind us that these were tangible events that real people experienced.
Many like the simulation... Its kind of a love it or hate it thing. In some cases I think its pretty good and in others not so much. Overall I think the use of the simulator segments on this channel is pretty good.
@@afh7689 cayo coco is open and was close of the emergency position, and all the other airports are open and opertive. Santa Clara, Holguin Santiago, maybe was other reason that cause turn back to miami
@@carolann8286 It's almost like the Titanic movie inverted. You know they'll make it but still the tension is real. Fire on board, turning back "we have batteries in the hold," circling, altitude alert. Then the pilot stops responding to ATC...
I agree that the decision to land at Miami runway 270 was very stupid. Several alternatives were available that didn't require the plane to fly over a dense urban area.
Oh yes, uncontrolled fire might as well be certain death. Most aircraft do not survive. Usually on the ground as fast as physically possible... well, LANDED on the ground as fast as possible is the best course of action.
A question for VASAviation (or a devoted fan, which I'm unfortunately not) if you're reading this: Has it been difficult finding content in recent months with the covid shutdowns or has the tightening of budgets lead to just as many notwothy incidents?
Someone might have answered this but why didn't they land in Cuba? I'd be pretty nervous knowing I was carrying lithium ion batteries and there was a fire warning?!
Gitmo has everything and would be able to accommodate an emergency of a large aircraft. I also confirmed this with a friend of mine who flies for a Major US airline. If you have a fire, you get down immediately. I believe the pilots decisions were riddled with errors- choosing to go back to Miami, doing the 360 on final and dropping to 700’, landing heavy on the downwind. All could have been disastrous.
Supernumeraries is also the term used when describing a rainbow that appears to start repeating the color band sequence. (you can google rainbow supernumeraries if you want)
ValueJet 592 went down in 10 minutes due to an onboard fire. You don't get much time. I'm sure they were thinking "We're still flying." The entire time.
@@AliceConsortium The fact they were to high on final at Miami had nothing to do with how high they were over Cuba. And fire onboard an aircraft would surely meet the "unless you have to" requirement. If they wanted to, they could have probably landed at Aeropuerto Abel Santamaria at Santa Clara, which if the flight track on the map is accurate, would have been the closest airport with a runway long enough to handle a 767.
imagine flying a plane that is telling you its on fire and then having to tell ATC that you have 66,000 pounds of jet fuel on board... thats probably the scariest part
Must have been horribly nerve racking knowing you have Li batteries and a fire indication. That can go bad quick and hard to starve those types with depressurization alone..
He was at 33,000 feet. Sure, Havana and Varadero were closer. But he probably didn't feel like nosediving with a potentially volatile cargo ..... The sensible option was Miami, in order to factor in a safe descent.
You 100% gun it as fast as possible without breaking your aircraft- At the cost of almost anything else, as most aircraft with uncontrolled fire do not make it. Those that have landed as soon as possible and were lucky to have somewhere to do it.
I can't figure out the relationship between Strat Air and Northern Air Cargo. (NAC is listed as the airline which uses callsign Yukon.) The two company names have totally different websites, and I can't find any mention of NAC on the Strat Air website...
Strat Air is a subsidiary of NAC's parent company (so NAC's sibling) and operated by NAC: worldairlinenews.com/2018/07/02/a-new-airline-brand-is-born-stratair-operated-by-northern-air-cargo/ The NAC brand serves Alaska and StratAir serves from Miami southbound
I always think of the UPS 747 on fire and SO SO close but never made it flew to high over dubai Intl I think? Cockpit full.of smoke, captain disabilated, FO trying to land it without basically anything but a radio...
Turning back? Was there nothing closer? Fire often means the loss of the aircraft. Landing in a field is often safer. Worst thing on an aircraft. That is crazy.
Let's get the passengers out of the airplane before we open the doors... I was thinking the pilot means the cargo doors, but I am thinking how many windows does that airplane have that open
Approach was probably more interested in "ok how soon does this plane ABSOLUTELY HAVE TO be on the ground", whereas ground probably wanted to know how big of a fuel spill and/or fire they were going to have to deal with if everything went wrong.
The firefighting squad wants to know fuel in pounds so they know how big the fire could be. And ATC wants to know fuel in hours so they know how long the airplane can fly.
It is to keep in everyone's mind that it's a big plane, because smaller planes following too close can be flipped right over from the wake turbulence of the big plane. Wake turbulence is the spinning air that is created behind planes as they fly: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wake_turbulence
Why would they not just drop into Havana if they they had a fire indication?? Seems crazy to add that extra time and then be focused on taxiing to the ramp rather than getting a fire inspection after landing.
Not a pilot, so probably a million reasons why not, but...isn’t there some way to depressurize the plane? Put the crew on oxygen and take oxygen rich air away from the fire?
Cargo planes have fire suppression systems and smoke detectors. If there was a fire they could just deploy the suppression system. Dangerous goods are only loaded in designated area also.
A lithium fire cannot be put out by a deprivation of oxygen. It's self-sustaining in regards to oxygen. Only way is to cool to stop the chain reaction or by taking away the material - neither being an option here. Old video on the subject th-cam.com/video/vS6KA_Si-m8/w-d-xo.html
I cant speak for the 767 freighters but I imagine it is the same as on the 777F. In the event of a cargo fire there are two different types of cargo holds: the lower cargo and main deck cargo hold. Lower holds have fire suppression systems using halon fire extinguishers (initially to put the fire out and metered bottles slowly releasing to keep a certain halon concentration to prevent fire from reigniting). The main deck only has fire detection so in the event of a main deck cargo fire you would depressurize the cabin and descend at maximum speed to a diversion airport. The checklist for that case includes the phrase “if the fire situation becomes uncontrollable, consider an immediate landing”. Lithium batteries are not stored in the main deck.
Why would you do a downwind landing in an aircraft overweight? Especially since time was taken to circle 360 to lose altitude? And it is hilarious the fire rescue blocked the aircraft- exactly as the Captain requested them NOT to do!
With a fire you actually ignore most safety issues, you get on the ground or you get dead is the usual advice. Most aircraft report a fire, go missing and its as simple as that. Those that survived landed in minutes. Quite frankly, you also have no aircraft to save for the airline either. so you can burn the breaks, land early, stop late, break a few lights, whatever.
Dangerous Goods like lithium batteries (in larger quantities) are classified as CAO (Cargo Aircraft Only). The captain needs to know the amount, loading position and hazards about the loaded cargo, which is summarized in the NOTOC (Notification To Captain) message, that the head loader and the captain has to sign pre-flight. The is a loooot of stuff (especially poisonous or explosive goods) that are CAO and cannot be transported on passenger flights.
@@CapStar362 Furthermore, it's not ALL lithium batteries that are banned on passenger aircraft, it's just batteries over a certain size, I think 100 watt-hours energy stored. If it was ALL lithium batteries that were banned, you wouldn't be able to take your phone on board.
@@44R0Ndin of course its not ALL batteries, i was referring to having them in cargo holds, but, i had simply forgotten that it only applied to PAX airliners and not Cargo Aircraft Only.
Well that's a terrible scenario. Basically "we may have a fire that if unsuppressed will probably kill us in less than ten minutes and we're way more than ten minutes away from landing."
ATC, why all the uncoordinated questions??? Why asking about speed? Why multiple questions about fuel? Why do you care if there's smoke or only fire alarm? You still have the airport?? Still have the airport??? Yukon 860, going to get you out first. Going to get out first. Just clear the traffic, for God's sake!!!
This is one (of several) reasons we need to normalize relations with Cuba. That plane should have been able to land in Cuba instead of having to fly all the way back to Florida.
I don't think poor relations between the US and Cuba would have prevented an emergency landing. A Norwegian airliner made an emergency landing in Iran a couple of years ago. It was a diplomatic nightmare afterwards since they couldn't import the spare parts needed to fix the plane due to the sanctions, but nobody worried about that during the emergency. The Iranians did exactly what anyone else would do when there is an emergency and provided all necessary assistance.
Even going all the way back to Miami they had excess altitude to burn. Trying to land in Cuba probably wouldn't have been any faster. Lithium batteries plus fire indications is bad news. If Cuba would have been faster I don't doubt these pilots would choose it.
@@setharnold9764 I doubt they took the engines to fully idle as soon as they turned around. They had altitude to burn because they misjudged the approach (easily done when you have other things on your mind).
Pilot: "We need to make an emergency landing, we have a fire indication on board!" ATC: "Alrighty standby for vectors to Havana" Pilot: "Better dead than red" ATC: "Standby vectors to Miami" Bald eagle: single freedom tear
Windows? I guess everyone on board can exit through them in a pinch. My guess is that they were afraid the rear of the plane was on fire and didn't want to open any doors in fear of feeding it/causing an explosion. But it's a long drop to the ground…
@@carbon1255 There usually aren't that many windows on a cargo plane other than those in the cockpit. None, in fact, in this one. And it's still a long drop, even with the ropes. Have you tried lowering yourself on a rope in an emergency? I haven't, but I can hazard a guess on the risks involved. I didn't think I needed to spell everything out in my original response, though.
@@pawpatrolnews They don't roll down, they're plug-type windows that slide fwd. and aft in a track, and at the fwd. travel limit fit into the fuselage structure cutout such as the old fashioned stopper in a hand basin or bathtub. The more pressure differential inside the plane, the harder the window is pushed against the cutout perimeter frame. The B-767 uses a crank operating system similar to an automobile as the window is large and somewhat heavy.
Some planes just don't have the equipment to dump fuel, so they either have to burn fuel as long as they reach their landing weight or do an oberweight landing, which is still preferable if you have a possible fire on board... However I am not sure whether the 767 has this equipment or not
![[REAL ATC] American A333 | ALL FLIGHT ATTENDANTS SICK in flight!](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/D9JQ-tnc4uQ/mqdefault.jpg)
![[REAL ATC] American A333 | ALL FLIGHT ATTENDANTS SICK in flight!](/img/tr.png)
*That was a fantastic job, indeed!*
Too sad to see the Miami airspace so empty during the pandemic :(
Have a 2nd cousin that timed up his retirement well leaving after 35 years at AA right now all you get to fly are desks on the ground with all cancelled flights out there
The lay offs are devastating.the airline industry. So sad.
Why didn’t they land in Cuba?
@@ChannelJanis .. That was exactly my though. If you suspect a fire you land ASAP, and if you confirm an uncontrollable fire on board you even need to consider an off-field landing. Cargo fires have downed planes in 15 minutes from first indication to crash. And having Li batteries on board certainly does not help. I understand that you need to balance risk so if you don't have an uncontrollable fire confirmed you probably will not ditch in the ocean just in case, but you have a perfectly good airport with a long runway in Havana that was right below you. How long did it take from declaring emergency to Havana to landing in MIA? There is a good chance that they would have died if they had a real fire, and there is nowhere to land between Havana and Miami.
Can you please make a video of regular ATC (no emergencies) and explaining everything said. That would be awesome!
I spent about 2 minutes of that clip wondering why the yellow plane in the bottom right was never moving until I realized it's the channel's logo fml xD
I spent a few minutes yesterday looking for my phone. It was in my hand. I actually put it down to look under something for my phone. Perhaps the neural net will make phones obsolete.
@@andytaylor1588 ... and then you get bombarded with spam and never mind the malware --- we actually have a pretty bad human malware going around the last half year or so, now imagine it came into your neural network ... from the other side of the world ...
Fun times!
😂 ngmi
Best laugh of the day!!! 🤣
Hoverplane
Prime example of the importance of good documentation. ATC asked the crew immediately if any dangerous goods are loaded, and the captain just needed to look onto (or even remembered) the NOTOC (Notification To Captain), which summarizes all dangerous goods loaded, with their respective loading position, quantity and possible dangers. Both the head loader and the Captain has to sign the NOTOC pre-flight.
He immediately reported, that he has lithium batteries loaded, which are by the way not banned, like some other comments said, they are (in larger quantities/as cargo) classified as CAO load (Cargo Aircraft Only).
You can hear how nervous the crew was (I would be sh***ng bricks too with a fire indication and Lithium loaded). And the need for the 360° on the approach probably made them even more nervous, because it meant more time in the air (which probably resulted in that low altitude of about 700ft)...
But they did the right descision with that - we all know by recent events what coming in too high and too fast can lead to...
All in all, a good representation of good airmenship by ATC and Crew. Probably the crews most stressful minutes in their lifes to day...
The crew did a great job in every aspect indeed
Bullshit
You get them down ASAP. It was a foolish decision
@@colinsmith1412 tell that to the pilot lol. he made the call..
@@colinsmith1412 They didn't do everything perfect, they clearly were nervous and got too low on their 360° circle.
But the crew thought that they were too high on the approach (while also keeping in mind being above MLAW -> overweight) and made the descision to circle and lose some energy before landing. The accident in Pakistan a few months ago showed the dangers of landing with too much energy, so in my (lay/avgeek) opinion, they did the right choice.
The other choise would have been too eventually go around and the need to re-establish on the approach, which probably would have taken even more time.
In the end - everything comes down to human factor, a (unclear/unconfirmed) cargo fire with Lithium loaded is probably the crew's worst nightmare. And if you try to look out of their perspective, probably thinking that at every second that whole fuselage behind them could light up like a candle, which would be a (almost) guaranteed total loss for both aircraft and crew (and possibly people on ground below) - I really don't want to ever be in the stress situation that they had to endure....
@@colinsmith1412 you weren’t flying. they were! pilot decisions come first!
That time without the pilot’s response must be nerve racking for ATC
Aviate - Navigate - Communicate.
In that order, highest to lowest priority.
The crew clearly was under high stress and got too low on the 360° circle, but as soon as they got their aircraft under control (aviate) and got their bearings (navigate) they started to talk to ATC again (communicate).
Pretty much text book - but yeah, that air traffic controller probably had a little sweat going...
@@marcel1416 extremely well said
Was thinking that too, when an emergency plane suddenly goes to radio silence. Especially when it’s accompanied by a low altitude alert. And for those pilots too, flying the plane while not knowing whether or not it is burning up behind them. Great job by everybody.
Glad everyone is safe also crew not panic and doing their best to handle EM situasion
700 feet! They got too low on their descending 360. Glad everything worked out.
yeah and thats 700 feet airport elevation. the ground may have been higher over where they were 360ing
@@andyasdf2078 They were east of Miami International Airport. The ground in that area is the Atlantic Ocean or just barely above it.
@@oldguydoesstuff120 yeah but at 6:29 isnt that solid white line where the coastline is? running north to south further to the east of where they were?
@@andyasdf2078 On closer inspection, it does look like they started the 360 over the city of Miami, with the southward part of the loop over Biscayne Bay. So yes, that jagged line is the coastline. Still, the whole of southern Florida is barely above sea level. The airport is at about 10 feet. Yes, descending from 700 feet is problematic, but rising terrain is not an issue. I would suspect some people in taller buildings got a bit uncomfortable, though.
@@oldguydoesstuff120 they then fairly rapidly climbed back up to 1600ft.. part of me is thinking maybe the altitude alert by atc actually prevented them from blindly descending into the ground
i know it was 'just' a cargo flight but this isnt brilliant to be honest
Classy statement by the pilot at the end.
Fire on board is one of the worst things that can happen..
All it takes is one spark.
3 places I would never want to be when there’s a fire-a spaceship, a sub or a plane.
Pretty scary situation indeed ...
esplosive decrompression?
Giuseppe explosive decompression is far from a pleasant situation, but still a lot better than an in-flight fire.
"Pilot does not respond" is going to replace "The call is coming from inside the house" in my nightmares...
Also, after asking a zillion times not to be blocked, how did that SUV end up blocking them at the end of the runway? Mad!
I think they were going to make sure they weren't on fire before they let them keep going. And the pilot said "We want to keep going IF we're not on fire".
@@yourhandlehere1 Possibly... However, it looks like there may be terrain markings on the map. Anyone know if there are tall hills or minor peaks around Miami? They could've lost sight of terrain due to weather and needed to correct for it (the kind of thing you ignore the radio while doing). I did notice the plane go 'MIA' status around 1400' near those markings on the map.
HauntedShadowsLegacy no terrain it’s completely flat
@@hauntedshadowslegacy2826 We're talking about on the runway after landing. But the tallest things in Florida are buildings and bridges.
@@hauntedshadowslegacy2826 As a Florida native this question made me laugh. A lot. Miami's elevation is barely above sea level. The highest elevation in Florida is less than 350ft and its basically in Georgia.
It's surprising that the pilots and the ATC just stay so calm. An on board fire can be so much more lethal than what some people imagine.
Thinking that myself. Heard from pilots who have said that a cabin fire is the one thing that turns their blood cold.
Well if you have the right mentality for it, the best way to stay calm in a situation like that would be "Well, there is nothing i can do about it besides what im doing right now.. so either it goes well or it does not"
Probably also helped that it was just indication and no smoke in the cockpit.
indeed! fire onboard is very unpredictable, with all the systems onboard of an airliner. i would have freaked out..
Yep I can see that, However pilots don’t fly by emotion. They fly by facts. There isn’t much point in getting worked up about things as it will only make the situation worse! They are trained to stay calm and handle it in a professional manner.
A lot of people have to stay cool and calm under enormous stress. Pilots, astronauts, deep sea or cave divers, ...
Italian astronaut Luca Parmitano for example nearly drowned (yes, you read that right, drowned, in water) during a space walk in 2013. Keeping his cool and using what he had, he made his way back to the airlock ... and lived. Panic would have been rather detrimental to his survival.
But it can be anyone, anywhere. You drive on the highway at a nice clip and suddenly a wheel blows out. OK, you need to slow down carefully and only gentle steering, and bring the car to a stop on the hard shoulder. Easy (or complicated) as that.
Whew! Altitude 700’ and no radio response from the stricken plane gave me a few minutes of nerves right there! Glad all turned out well.
That was a well handled emergency by both the crew and the approach controller. That pilot was cool and calm on the radio for someone in a potential burning plane! You could hear the relief when they confirmed no fire and no heat on the doors tho... could hear him smiling.
Great visuals on this video, and glad everyone got down safely. I could sense the understandable tension from the crew but they and the ATC did a great job.
Well done VAS, great capture and diagrams as usual!!! Loved it.
Possible fire, batteries, no response and low altitude had me so nervous now I need the A'OK and the smooth as silk pilots to chat to me.
You could not tell if the Captain was watering his flowers or in a emergency flying death trap on fire. Cool and calm.You want this Captain for your plane.
Wow salió aquí yo seguí el vuelo cuando se declaró en emergencia por fr24 buen vídeo.
3 calls from tower with no response sent chills...
Controller must have been nervous with the report of fire, pilots not responding and the plane descending too low.
And there are no empty fields anywhere in that area around the airport. Dense city and suburbscape.
I know the visualization is a recreation and may not be exactly accurate or to scale but Yukon 860 said multiple times what they intended to do, pull clear of the runway. Despite that they were blocked by the van?
They moved on when the van allowed to do so
@@VASAviation Because during a fire, you want to ensure that the aircraft is obstructed, so that confusion can reign. They shoulda rammed it.
Possibility #1: The fire was real, the plane was going to burn up and the white van blocking them wouldn't change anything.
Possibility #2: There was no fire, the white van moves and they can taxi.
they can evacuate anywhre they want. Thing is ARFF vehicles take care not only care of the aircraft but of all of the buildings and people at the airport. If there is no fire, they're good to wait or evacuate if pilots think it's safer. If there is fire, the airplane must stop and remain clear of buildings and far from people --> evacuate on the runway. That is the procedure for a [possible] fire.
It might not be visible and that's why they wanted to check for heat. Invisible doesn't mean inexistent.
This channel is so great!
I remember watching/listening to this live as it happened. I thought they went down after the plane was only at 600ft outside of the airport property.
My teacher once told me she flew from Morocco to France, but during the Flight some idiot didn't extinguish his cigarette so when the cigarette ended in the trashcan of the airplane the whole passenger cabin was filled with smoke so they dumped fuel close to Spain and made a emergency landing in Spain, i think that was the reason that they started banning smoking in airplanes
Plus a plane crashed and killed many people after a fire from a smoking butt in the toilet trashcan. Think it was a Varig flight in France?
Wow! That was an exciting one. I'm glad the ending was boring. 👍
Hope everyone is ok that must have been very scary hope everyone recovers from the shock thank you so much for sharing the video stay safe
If you ever can get your hands on a video of that device they're talking about to scan for hot spots, it'd be cool to see in use!
Just a pretty standard thermal camera I'm sure, plenty of fire departments have them for that exact purpose.
@@44R0Ndin That's what I figured it was, but never know for sure until you ask haha thanks!
I notice in nearly every emergency recording how bad the coordination and communication between the controllers must be. In nearly every video as in this one the pilots had to repeat fuel remaining, reason for emergency, POB etc multiple times to different controllers. Double checking is fine and important but I always have the impression that the next controller the aircraft is talking to has no idea what is going on. I think it should go without saying that the controller who picks up the emergency passes ALL information to next one and so on until the aerodrome (and maybe the company) is informed aswell
but how much time do they have to pass that information?
@@gronki1 Eventough this aircraft surely flew 30 mins or more back from Cuba to Miami the information should be transferred nearly instantly through the ATC facilities. As an ATCO myself I can tell you have two options: Getting information directly by your colleague or hear into the frequency that is dealing with the EMERG and get the information yourself.
Seems like a visible light or even thermal CCTV in the cargo hold would provide more confident assessment of things like this.
Any reason for them to not to descend faster in the way back? To avoid having to do the 360? I guess their groundspeed might have been lower.
They were probably at Vne on decent already. Couldn’t descend any faster. Guessing.
I'm always shocked by how much fuel some planes have
Good job!
that was a really expensive sensor replacement.
You would rather have ten expensive false positives than one deadly false negative. I assume the sensors are designed with that in mind.
at least they saved on a fuel by not dumping it :D
haha a landing is cheaper then buy a new aircraft + crew.
@@nowaymuller6643 not really, insurance would pay for a whole new plane.
@@SupremeRuleroftheWorld depend what happen. Transporting highly dangerous goods well...
FYI... I really don't like the flight sim segments. They really take away from the rest of your material.
The rest of the info is GREAT!!!
Thanks!!
I agree the flightsim is not added value.
I disagree. I feel like the flight sim segments make the whole event feel more "real," in spite of the relatively poor graphics and whatnot. Like the old saying goes, "seeing is believing," I feel like the flight sim segments help remind us that these were tangible events that real people experienced.
Many like the simulation...
Its kind of a love it or hate it thing.
In some cases I think its pretty good and in others not so much. Overall I think the use of the simulator segments on this channel is pretty good.
must be terrifying to have such an emergency over the ocean
I wonder why they wouldn't land in Havana? The cargo is insured.
@@andytaylor1588 Varadero (one of the busiest airports in Cuba) was even closer.
@@afh7689 cayo coco is open and was close of the emergency position, and all the other airports are open and opertive. Santa Clara, Holguin Santiago, maybe was other reason that cause turn back to miami
@@andytaylor1588 perhaps reducing some of the overweight condition?
Not sure what’s worse, a potential fire or diverting back to Miami.
Damn, not the first time i’ve seen someone bashing miami in recent times, it’s that bad?
Am I the only one who said "Oh shit" when the controller mentioned the batteries? Even while knowing from the video title the story ended well?
ikr, anything lithium + fire = a very bad idea indeed
Not at all, those lithium batteries are dangerous , kinda surprised they didn't land in Cuba asap since going back to kmia adds some flight time
I bet when the pilots see batteries on board a cargo plane they will worry but they take their time
Mikosch2 This entire video made me nervous even though I knew the outcome. The batteries on board, his low altitude, oh my goodness.
@@carolann8286 It's almost like the Titanic movie inverted. You know they'll make it but still the tension is real. Fire on board, turning back "we have batteries in the hold," circling, altitude alert. Then the pilot stops responding to ATC...
Tower calling over and over with no response after notifiying them of 700ft altitude must've been stressful as hell for that controller.
BW8040 20th of June this year, same aircraft returned to Miami. Very odd.
I agree that the decision to land at Miami runway 270 was very stupid. Several alternatives were available that didn't require the plane to fly over a dense urban area.
I would have done the same thing in their situation. An inflight fire is not joke-- at the first indication of one, you need to land ASAP.
Not a pilot, but to me, a fire (or even a suspected fire) has to be the worse case scenario - and they stayed so calm❣️
Oh yes, uncontrolled fire might as well be certain death. Most aircraft do not survive. Usually on the ground as fast as physically possible... well, LANDED on the ground as fast as possible is the best course of action.
I love your videos even though I’ve never been on a plane
A question for VASAviation (or a devoted fan, which I'm unfortunately not) if you're reading this: Has it been difficult finding content in recent months with the covid shutdowns or has the tightening of budgets lead to just as many notwothy incidents?
Fewer flights, fewer possibilities of problems occuring
This pilot sounds very relaxed I would be
shitting bricks.. Big ones
Someone might have answered this but why didn't they land in Cuba? I'd be pretty nervous knowing I was carrying lithium ion batteries and there was a fire warning?!
Great job, thank you
NCJ37 answered 300, north Central 37 instead of '330' in the transscript
I'm assuming either a faulty fire-detection system, or a small fire that self-extinguished before landing?
Why wouldn’t they have put it down in Havana or NAS Guantanamo Bay instead of going all the way back to Miami? Dump gas over the Atlantic and land.
Good question maybe because there wasent any airports built to handle a 767 fully loaded but idk tbh
I am thinking that MIA would would be the best choice for ARFF.
Takes about that long/far to get down from cruise altitude. He was still high when on the approach.
Dumping fuel take a long time. It was probably also quicker to land there.
Gitmo has everything and would be able to accommodate an emergency of a large aircraft. I also confirmed this with a friend of mine who flies for a Major US airline. If you have a fire, you get down immediately.
I believe the pilots decisions were riddled with errors- choosing to go back to Miami, doing the 360 on final and dropping to 700’, landing heavy on the downwind. All could have been disastrous.
Any word on what happened? Was it just a faulty sensor?
7:25: the word you are missing is "supernumeraries".
Supernumeraries is also the term used when describing a rainbow that appears to start repeating the color band sequence. (you can google rainbow supernumeraries if you want)
@@k.pacificnw02134 Though I doubt somehow that they have a rainbow on board …
@@advorak8529 Could've been a group of warlocks onboard lmao
ValueJet 592 went down in 10 minutes due to an onboard fire. You don't get much time. I'm sure they were thinking "We're still flying." The entire time.
Why do they make a u turn instead of landing in the nearest airport?
Exactly
At FL330 over the ocean its probable Miami was the closest factoring in the descent
You don't want to be landing in Cuba unless you have to, and notice how they were still too high by the time they reached Miami anyway
Alice can you please explain why??
@@AliceConsortium The fact they were to high on final at Miami had nothing to do with how high they were over Cuba. And fire onboard an aircraft would surely meet the "unless you have to" requirement. If they wanted to, they could have probably landed at Aeropuerto Abel Santamaria at Santa Clara, which if the flight track on the map is accurate, would have been the closest airport with a runway long enough to handle a 767.
Lucky they were so close to Miami, I'm sure if it was really bad they could also have landed in Cuba. An in flight fire is a terrifying prospect.
Scary stuff!
Tyler Mac sir there is ah air traffic at Miami airport JetBlue is ready for landing
When he said that they were gonna open the doors, the missing word [...] is supernumeraries.
Thanks
imagine flying a plane that is telling you its on fire and then having to tell ATC that you have 66,000 pounds of jet fuel on board... thats probably the scariest part
Must have been horribly nerve racking knowing you have Li batteries and a fire indication. That can go bad quick and hard to starve those types with depressurization alone..
Havana or Varadero were closest to their position, if i had a Fire Indication i would put my aircraft on the closest airport available.
Those airports might not be able to handle an overweight cargo 767.
And risking to be imprisoned by commie's?
He was at 33,000 feet. Sure, Havana and Varadero were closer. But he probably didn't feel like nosediving with a potentially volatile cargo ..... The sensible option was Miami, in order to factor in a safe descent.
@@andresouza2314 By commie's what?
@@andresouza2314 this man is still living in 1960
He was at 9000 feet and 420 knots 😳 probably going really fast to get on the ground as soon as possible.
You 100% gun it as fast as possible without breaking your aircraft- At the cost of almost anything else, as most aircraft with uncontrolled fire do not make it. Those that have landed as soon as possible and were lucky to have somewhere to do it.
Fire up in the air is no joke. I wonder what was wring with the indicator.
Crew were leaving the cockpit open too much, and over time (Miami is hot) a piece inside the sensor melted. Pretty scary
I can't figure out the relationship between Strat Air and Northern Air Cargo. (NAC is listed as the airline which uses callsign Yukon.) The two company names have totally different websites, and I can't find any mention of NAC on the Strat Air website...
Strat Air is a subsidiary of NAC's parent company (so NAC's sibling) and operated by NAC: worldairlinenews.com/2018/07/02/a-new-airline-brand-is-born-stratair-operated-by-northern-air-cargo/
The NAC brand serves Alaska and StratAir serves from Miami southbound
I always think of the UPS 747 on fire and SO SO close but never made it flew to high over dubai Intl I think? Cockpit full.of smoke, captain disabilated, FO trying to land it without basically anything but a radio...
Proceed direct to CHHAZ? Well, that would be in Seattle guys.....
Turning back? Was there nothing closer? Fire often means the loss of the aircraft. Landing in a field is often safer. Worst thing on an aircraft. That is crazy.
Let's get the passengers out of the airplane before we open the doors... I was thinking the pilot means the cargo doors, but I am thinking how many windows does that airplane have that open
Why the difference in fuel indicated? I.e why did approach ask for time and ground ask for pounds? Sorry for my stupid and thanks in advance.
I’ve heard some pilots on this channel give fuel remaining in terms of flight time remaining.
Approach was probably more interested in "ok how soon does this plane ABSOLUTELY HAVE TO be on the ground", whereas ground probably wanted to know how big of a fuel spill and/or fire they were going to have to deal with if everything went wrong.
@@44R0Ndin Oh that makes sense. Thanks.
The firefighting squad wants to know fuel in pounds so they know how big the fire could be. And ATC wants to know fuel in hours so they know how long the airplane can fly.
This is probably something really simple and obvious, but why are some aircraft called ‘heavy’.. as in Yukon 860 heavy?
Type of aircraft. MTOW 160 tonnes or more.
136
It's for airplanes with a MTOW higher than 136.000 kg
It is to keep in everyone's mind that it's a big plane, because smaller planes following too close can be flipped right over from the wake turbulence of the big plane. Wake turbulence is the spinning air that is created behind planes as they fly: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wake_turbulence
@@GabesHacks okay, sure, but the propwash from a DC-3 can blow small planes off the taxiway. So....
why did the pilot choose a VFR approach instead of an IFR using a localizer?
Why would they not just drop into Havana if they they had a fire indication?? Seems crazy to add that extra time and then be focused on taxiing to the ramp rather than getting a fire inspection after landing.
Had to descend anyway. Havana wouldn't have saved time
What's with the entire altitude thing? Seems to have made the controller somewhat nervous
Why did he diverted to Miami? While Cuba was closer?
I'm confused... the pilot said he wanted to get out before opening any doors... how do you do that?
PROBABLY not something you want to hear when you're flying a cargo plane out of Hong Kong... "Sir, the rubber dogsh*t is on fire!"
Not a pilot, so probably a million reasons why not, but...isn’t there some way to depressurize the plane? Put the crew on oxygen and take oxygen rich air away from the fire?
Cargo planes have fire suppression systems and smoke detectors. If there was a fire they could just deploy the suppression system. Dangerous goods are only loaded in designated area also.
A lithium fire cannot be put out by a deprivation of oxygen. It's self-sustaining in regards to oxygen. Only way is to cool to stop the chain reaction or by taking away the material - neither being an option here. Old video on the subject th-cam.com/video/vS6KA_Si-m8/w-d-xo.html
I cant speak for the 767 freighters but I imagine it is the same as on the 777F. In the event of a cargo fire there are two different types of cargo holds: the lower cargo and main deck cargo hold. Lower holds have fire suppression systems using halon fire extinguishers (initially to put the fire out and metered bottles slowly releasing to keep a certain halon concentration to prevent fire from reigniting). The main deck only has fire detection so in the event of a main deck cargo fire you would depressurize the cabin and descend at maximum speed to a diversion airport. The checklist for that case includes the phrase “if the fire situation becomes uncontrollable, consider an immediate landing”. Lithium batteries are not stored in the main deck.
Caygill's Holy crow, that’s worse than I thought! Thanks for the info.
Tyler Mac and the meter right is above me in the us over
Why would you do a downwind landing in an aircraft overweight? Especially since time was taken to circle 360 to lose altitude? And it is hilarious the fire rescue blocked the aircraft- exactly as the Captain requested them NOT to do!
My only guess (and I'm not any sort of expert) is they possibly didn't want the plane getting too close to the airport if it was on fire
I wondered the same thing. Landing heavy with a tailwind.
Saved 4-5 minutes of (potentially valuable) time by not having to go all the way out and approach the airport from the other direction.
With a fire you actually ignore most safety issues, you get on the ground or you get dead is the usual advice. Most aircraft report a fire, go missing and its as simple as that. Those that survived landed in minutes.
Quite frankly, you also have no aircraft to save for the airline either. so you can burn the breaks, land early, stop late, break a few lights, whatever.
i thought lithium batteries were outright prohibited by FAA as Cargo
That is why they go on a cargo-only flight.
Dangerous Goods like lithium batteries (in larger quantities) are classified as CAO (Cargo Aircraft Only).
The captain needs to know the amount, loading position and hazards about the loaded cargo, which is summarized in the NOTOC (Notification To Captain) message, that the head loader and the captain has to sign pre-flight.
The is a loooot of stuff (especially poisonous or explosive goods) that are CAO and cannot be transported on passenger flights.
okay yes, i forgot they did specify PAX aircraft it is forbidden, i forgot that detail.
@@CapStar362 Furthermore, it's not ALL lithium batteries that are banned on passenger aircraft, it's just batteries over a certain size, I think 100 watt-hours energy stored. If it was ALL lithium batteries that were banned, you wouldn't be able to take your phone on board.
@@44R0Ndin of course its not ALL batteries, i was referring to having them in cargo holds, but, i had simply forgotten that it only applied to PAX airliners and not Cargo Aircraft Only.
Why didn't they go for Havanna?
PAXperMortem Theyvprobably needed time to descend.
Well that's a terrible scenario. Basically "we may have a fire that if unsuppressed will probably kill us in less than ten minutes and we're way more than ten minutes away from landing."
ATC, why all the uncoordinated questions??? Why asking about speed? Why multiple questions about fuel? Why do you care if there's smoke or only fire alarm? You still have the airport?? Still have the airport??? Yukon 860, going to get you out first. Going to get out first. Just clear the traffic, for God's sake!!!
They need to know fuel quantity for firefighting reasons.
Bryan J, pull yourself together, man, you're hysterical.
Someone is trolling with the TH-cam English subtitles. They spicy in the middle, pg at the end.
Was there an actual fire in the end or just indicated?
No heat anomalies indicated upon inspection.
Indication or not, any indication of a fire onboard is ground to assume the fire is real, and they action should be taken immediately.
There was a malfunction in the airplane’s sensors; just an indication. The plane went through a lot of inspection after that incident
@@sammusubi7683 As one would expect. After any kind of emergency, thorough inspections are beyond just necessary.
@@sammusubi7683 ooor the halon worked.
This is one (of several) reasons we need to normalize relations with Cuba. That plane should have been able to land in Cuba instead of having to fly all the way back to Florida.
I don't think poor relations between the US and Cuba would have prevented an emergency landing. A Norwegian airliner made an emergency landing in Iran a couple of years ago. It was a diplomatic nightmare afterwards since they couldn't import the spare parts needed to fix the plane due to the sanctions, but nobody worried about that during the emergency. The Iranians did exactly what anyone else would do when there is an emergency and provided all necessary assistance.
Even going all the way back to Miami they had excess altitude to burn. Trying to land in Cuba probably wouldn't have been any faster. Lithium batteries plus fire indications is bad news. If Cuba would have been faster I don't doubt these pilots would choose it.
@@setharnold9764 I doubt they took the engines to fully idle as soon as they turned around. They had altitude to burn because they misjudged the approach (easily done when you have other things on your mind).
Pilot: "We need to make an emergency landing, we have a fire indication on board!"
ATC: "Alrighty standby for vectors to Havana"
Pilot: "Better dead than red"
ATC: "Standby vectors to Miami"
Bald eagle: single freedom tear
When co-pilot says "hey, I left my phone in Miami, can we go back?"
Lithium battery cargo... no shit to play. Worse would be only explosives. Pilots sounded like was riding ticking bomb.
Too bad, we don’t get final cause of what caused the alarm.
Sensor malfunction
I don't understand the "we will exit before we open any doors" thing, what does that mean? How do you exit without opening doors?
Windows? I guess everyone on board can exit through them in a pinch. My guess is that they were afraid the rear of the plane was on fire and didn't want to open any doors in fear of feeding it/causing an explosion. But it's a long drop to the ground…
The ropes
@@antisoda cockpit is where you can get out of the window only, the others don't open. There is ropes to let you escape that way.
@@carbon1255 There usually aren't that many windows on a cargo plane other than those in the cockpit. None, in fact, in this one. And it's still a long drop, even with the ropes. Have you tried lowering yourself on a rope in an emergency? I haven't, but I can hazard a guess on the risks involved. I didn't think I needed to spell everything out in my original response, though.
So why not land in Cuba?? Be interesting to know why you would not land at the nearest port.
They had to descend anyway. They can't just plunge.
they were at 33,000 ft apparently, so it was the closest airport considering you have a decent rate limit.
Diverting to Miami vs Cuba was a stupid decision and lucky to be alive
How do they get StratAir from Northern Air Cargo and Yukon?”
The plane is branded stratair but is operated by NAC who’s call sign is Yukon.
How do you exit the aircraft without opening any doors?
Ropes
Oh I see, so they can live out their dream of being Tarzan
Through the sliding cockpit windows using the inertia reel cables.
@@davef.2811 I never thought the planes windows actually rolled down. Lol, imagine them going through a drive-thru to order lunch 😅
@@pawpatrolnews They don't roll down, they're plug-type windows that slide fwd. and aft in a track, and at the fwd. travel limit fit into the fuselage structure cutout such as the old fashioned stopper in a hand basin or bathtub. The more pressure differential inside the plane, the harder the window is pushed against the cutout perimeter frame. The B-767 uses a crank operating system similar to an automobile as the window is large and somewhat heavy.
Probably the Loadmaster having a cigarette in the back
::wipes_forehead::
whew, i was scared for um there for a min
4:40 10 o'clock and 7 miles.
Soo..... was there actually a fire?
I wonder why they didn't dump fuel...they had plenty of time for it.
Dump with a fire somewhere? You crazy
I wonder why they didn't dump fuel
Some planes just don't have the equipment to dump fuel, so they either have to burn fuel as long as they reach their landing weight or do an oberweight landing, which is still preferable if you have a possible fire on board... However I am not sure whether the 767 has this equipment or not