GSO: "...I need souls on board and fuel in pounds..." Pilot: "133 souls and two hours of fuel". GSO: "...emergency services are requesting your fuel in pounds." Pilot: "Yes ma'am, we have two hours of fuel and we'll be on.... two hours of fuel."
It sounded like the pilots were on oxygen, which would make sense given the situation. You don't want your pilots being affected by smoke or fumes. The mask does it harder to hear, though. Also, they were, after all, trying to fly an emergency approach at the time. Communicate is at the end of "Aviate, navigate, communicate" for a reason.
In the 7110 (the ATC bible), you're required to get remaining fuel in TIME during an emergency. (She was saying "time" but the caption says "pounds", until she asked specifically for pounds the second time). And the Crash Crew (emergency personnel) were the ones wondering how much fuel they have, in pounds. The pilots don't have to give that as it really doesn't matter as much for ATC. That's usually something the pilot will tell the emergency personnel themselves.
@@johnniesmiling8787 Agreed for the most part, but, regarding the last sentence, by the time pilots are communicating directly with the fire crew, isn't that usually a bit late for that information? The pilots usually don't talk to emergency personnel until they're already on the ground and stopped or slowed to taxi speed, do they?
@@vbscript2 Yep, definitely masked up. Would be SOP for smoke in the cockpit surely, and you can hear the tell-tale sound of the mask.... every firefighter knows it. For those that don't, listen for the "Darth Vader" sounding hiss as he inhales.
Im a bit confused by this actually. Aircraft time on fuel is based on a singular unit of speed at certain heights. So its no an accurate reading of amount of fuel. And anyway, these large aircraft state weight of fuel on the dash so why not simply always tell the weight instead as its not variable?
The Cessna that was told to wait N79549 used to belong to my father. He left it to me in his will. My step mother put him in a nursing home and sold the plane and his house that he left me as well before he passed away. Seeing the N number in the video brought back lots of memories, some good, some bad. Anyway enjoyed the video as always.
As an AA mechanic at a station that specializes in damaged Airbus, I'm watching wondering why we never heard of it and why didn't they bring it here. Then the pilot says it's in the bag. That explains everything. It's a passenger laptop and there is no aircraft damage. That's why we didn't hear about it.
@@averye My comparison would be of eighties built Boeings compared to brand new Airbus. It wouldn't be fair, I will say that I love not greasing, changing, and rigging flight control cables.
I was the on call mechanic in GSO that was called out to this plane. Had to do that “smoke in the cabin” work card. I think the AA rep from Heico came over also “Art” I might still have that log page on cam scanner. 5 log book pages and the W/C is 17 pages.
This is the fourth one of these videos I've watched now. Subbed. Videos are extremely well done. Also, I'm always surprised at how calm and collected ATC and pilots are even during an emergency. Also, as soon as they said the fire was in a bag, my first guess was lithium ion battery fire in luggage. Indeed it was...
yeah this was handled like clockwork beautiful to see that even with fire in cabin (one of the worst things possible) pilots got the plane down ATC and ground control got everyone coordinated it sounded like the flight attendents dealt with the fire itself and the airport firefighters were right there should things go wrong.
@@malahammer I disagree. There is always the option/possibility of a crew just losing their minds and mentally shutting down. We just don't often find enough pieces of the black boxes to hear about them.
SMOKY's gotta be the cutest radio handle ever for a fire brigade. So adorable! GREAT video production, no BS, no intros, no "buy my VPN" stuff. Simple, clear and visual. Thank you!
Handle of SMOKY + that guy's accent is a winning combination. I'd feel safe as a pilot hearing them as the ARFFS chief. Thanks very much for the kind comment. 🙂
Now this is why you should never put batteries in your baggage to be checked in the haul. This could have a catastrophic consequences if that battery had been in the cargo bay. Luckily this time no harm. Great animations!
Well, a battery fire isn't an issue in the cargo hold. There's a fire detection system there as well and smoke won't be pulled into the cabin, so it's a fairly "save" situation which can be handled by the crew.
@@RubenKelevra Except for the aircraft systems that may run under the passenger deck and above the hold. If you have a large fire in that area, which could easily happen if a battery fire broke out, then it could damage critical systems which would then lead to bad things. There was a FedEx 747? (IIRC) which crashed somewhere in the middle east because a battery fire broke out in the hold, then grew and damaged critical control systems. (Mentour Pilot did a good vid on it) And lastly, you can't just vent to stop a battery fire as they are their own fuel source... Very dangerous situation to have in the hold.
@@RubenKelevra this is one of the worst takes i have seen in a while. Go look up how a lithium fire looks. They are almost impossible to extinguish and can easily grow quite large. The fire will also definitely spread. If it's in the luggage compartment, it's probably in a suitcase with clothes. Lithium fires have brought down planes before.
@@TheSwanies lithium fires are only dangerous if there are large batteries involved. Small batteries are hardly an issue. Have a look at the US: How many commercial airliners have "gone down" in the last 30 years, and how many lithium batteries are carried on each flight? Yeah. Zero and probably 3 per pax. So stop spreading nonsense fears.
This was a very professional, well organized response by everyone involved. I am seriously impressed. I do have to ask why the initial emergency callout wasn't included here.
ATC got the location of the galley fire wrong. The rear galley is not behind the cockpit as broadcast. ATC should have asked jet's intentions without prompting. This is a good training scenario.
It depends on what audio is available for inclusion. Coverage for enroute controllers tends to be more difficult to source than for terminal controllers.
I thought ATC was tone deaf to the Captain having his hands full. "Can you give me pounds..pounds.. pounds" He said 2 hours of Fuel remaining lady... Have one of the staff in your air conditioned lounge pull up a gallons/per/hour at cruise/chart on the Airbus and you have a solid approximation... A little busy in the Aircraft that's On Fire. A PRO Fireman would have a Chart handy converting Fuel Hours to Pounds of each aircraft he might encounter.. the "Aw Shucks" model "can you convert that for me Mr. Pilot" isn't professional at all. Have tools that DECREASE the need for Pilot attention during an Emergency.
SMOKY# is a great call-sign. 3 quick syllables instead of 6 with tiny pauses between each letter. Also instantly memorable/distinguishable even in an emergency to pilots and ATCs that they're fire crew.
Private pilot here. How come it always seems like a clown show coordinating communication with ARF? Often seems like an afterthought. Also why is there often confusion about fuel remaining time vs pounds?
I can't answer as to the comm issue, but as for the fuel, since different aircraft carry differing amounts of, and consume fuel at wildly different rates due to so many variables, giving a report in time remaining is meaningless to the firefighters (who use pounds to get a accurate measure of gallons remaining.) How much fuel is involved in a potential post landing (or crash) fire determines the level of firefighting response and resources needed.
RH and AG mentioned that the emergency information checklist asks for a lot, the SOB and Fuel is the primary information needed. Don't forget that many controllers are not pilots and don't always get the airplane terminal (gallery vs galley).
@@turbokatzenburg5732 I think asking in time is more for calculating how much the A/C has flown and how much time he has left, for example if a pilot has 2hours of fuel and has been doing circuits for 1:30 hours the atc could warn the pilot if for some reason the pilot doesn't notice which is highly doubtful, and in my airport they say during an emergency we need to take fuel both in time and pounds
Atc made a minor mistake. The aircraft was an Airbus. The pilots would have to dig out a conversion worksheet to convert from liters to pounds, unless airbus made a change to the flight computers giving the flight crew the fuel information in pounds.
I feel like everything something like this happens pilots always report time in fuel remaining rather than pounds. I mean 2 hours Fuel means nothing because 2 hours is dependent on fuel burn which people on the ground have no idea of.
2 hours can mean everything when it’s a matter of endurance. Pilots are trained and required to report to ATC in endurance, not pounds. ARF always seems to want the quantity in pounds, so there tends to be a communication disconnect.
@@jpfurnari5056 It also depends on what the fuel gauge reads, pounds, liters, or gallons. I hear there is some confusion about how the gauges should be standardized, or if there should be dual readings. Not a real pilot here just an FB observer.
This is EXACTLY, to the letter, the reason that most airlines limit the maximum size and maximum number of lithium-ion batteries you are allowed to bring on the aircraft, both in checked bags and in carry-on luggage. I checked the regulations, and made sure to purchase so that my things are well within those limits. From my understanding, the limits at the time I purchased my USB battery banks was something around 100 watt-hours. Now, lithium-ion battery banks are commonly available with much higher stored energy ratings than that, but I only take those when I'm camping, and when I'm camping I travel by automobile. The USB battery banks that I take on the aircraft are within the stored energy limits and always from a reputable brand, with as many battery protection systems on them (without duplicating function) as is practical (and I can't think of a situation where it's not practical to have all of them). The ones I buy are Anker brand, and I've never had a problem with them meeting or exceeding their specifications. Never buy one sight-unseen from some Chinese brand you've never heard of before, not without doing your research. Not only are you likely not going to get the full capacity they claim, the thing might even be actually dangerous to you, your devices, or even the aircraft you might fly on. Oh and do yourself a big favor, never leave anything with a lithium-ion battery in it inside your vehicle in the hot sun. They're very sensitive to high temperatures, and the result of exceeding their maximum temperature is what is known as "thermal runaway", basically the energy stored in the battery gets turned into heat within the battery instead of electricity, which accelerates that process, quickly leading to the lithium-ion battery bursting and starting a fire, just like what happened in this video. Basically, if you wouldn't leave a tin of instant biscuits in the car for as long as you plan to be away, don't leave something with a lithium-ion battery in that car either. If you can't put it someplace cooler than "inside the vehicle", take it with you, or leave it in the car but also leave the car running with the AC on (I know, gas prices these days make that not a favorable option, but it's better than your car burning to the ground isn't it?).
It's not just an airline limit. At least here in the U.S., the FAA has legal limits, though sometimes airlines impose even more strict limits than the FAA requires. The FAA does not limit the number of lithium ion batteries that a passenger may carry if they are all each individually under 100 W-hr, but they limit to 2 over that limit. Li ion batteries over 160 W-hr are not allowed at all. Also, all of them must be in carry-on luggage only, specifically so that they can be handled if they do catch on fire, such as in this situation. They don't have easy access to the cargo hold during flight. Much easier to both detect and handle a battery fire in the passenger cabin where it can be extinguished and contained in a fire bag. This is also why anything you order that has a lithium battery in it will be shipped to you over ground, not by air. Cargo flights have crashed before because of thermal runway in lithium batteries and they were banned from air cargo after that.
I was flying from France back to the USA in 2009 and some IDIOT decided to pop in the lavatory for a quick smoke. When you're six miles up and over the Atlantic Ocean and the smoke alarms go off, it's a pretty uneasy feeling. The idiot passenger got to deplane first. Had people in suits and uniforms waiting for him at the gate
It wasn't a problem here, but some ATCs insist on remaining fuel being given in a specific unit: pounds, kilos, gallons, etc, rather than hours. In an emergency situation the pilots are under a lot of pressure and don't have time to do a conversion. The ATC should accept the fuel remaining in whatever unit is given.
Having listened to a lot of these situations it seems like there's almost always miscommunication when requesting fuel remaining. It might be a good idea to train pilots to give fuel remaining in both time and weight. I think it'd still save time when the alternative is a back-and-forth clarification or having to ask the crew (who are busy thinking about other things, such as their emergency) multiple times.
@@AirTrafficVisualised The pilot is busy and should only be required to give the amount in whatever unit he has immediately available, either from gauges or in his mind. "Training" him to do an extra task isn't reasonable.
@@AirTrafficVisualised No... ATC and Fire should have a handbook that converts Hours to Pounds for every passenger aircraft they might encounter. Everyone on the ground should be EASING pilot responsibilities.. Not giving them more... That's called being a prepared/professional that's genuinely interested in seeing those onboard live by making the Pilot's task simpler. I carried HAZMAT qualifications for my job .. I had a handbook that allowed me to access risk of any hazardous chemical in under 10 seconds.. of which there are 1000's. The major Airlines don't use 1000 different planes. Very easily done. All procedures and toolkits should follow one mission .. save lives.
@@arcdestriumph586 Also, the exact amount (in whatever unit) is not really important anyways. It's more a question of "expect a huge fireball" or "don't worry too much about it". "2 hours" on a plane designed for regional hops is "rather full", whereas on a transatlantic flight it's "almost empty".
@@stephanweinberger Not true ...gear can rip into wing tanks after an on ground incident.. gushing fuel out .. No fireball from a high impact crash. Prolonged Fuel Burn danger sequence intitiated. Dale Earnhard Jr.'s Citation Crash and fuel burn a good example.
On listening to a lot of these Mayday communications between ATC and the aircraft, it seems like the amount of fuel on board is a bit of a bugaboo. Some give it in pounds, some give it in time, and It seems like ATC and the Mayday aircraft are never on the same page. It seems like using a universal fuel language would simplify things for both the ATC and the crews of the aircraft at a stressful time.
i hate when they use "personnel" on board. I much prefer "souls" on board as with an emergency the chance that they be all there is left is greatly heightened.
since seconds matter for fire on board; i'm surprised that fire engine communication with pilots is always a struggle.... i've seen other videos where they were talking on different channels, couldn't understand them, etc... sounds like there's room for improvement on clear and quick communication to be established.
its like that for safety for multiple reasons. the most common is to give the FD the ability to talk to each other without disrupting the ground control. a less common reason is so that if the plane has a threat onboard the field teams can coordinate with a better chance that the airplane is not receiving the information (ie there is a wanted person that has boarded the plane and they are holding push back till the pd can remove him)
@@arcdestriumph586 If the fire & rescue personnel can see flames coming from the aircraft they won't wait and just start extinguishing it right away, pilots communication or not. In this case specific instructions/requests were needed for a non-threatening situation. If the bag was catching fire uncontrollably, the pilot would've declared this before the landing attempt and fire & rescue would've handled by protocol. Name one example where a life was lost due to F&R using a different frequency?
@@someguy4915 So.. You think seconds don't count in an enclosed space with lots of people on board.. and a fire? You want to ease the workload of someone in an emergency/under stress.. Not add to the "to do" list. An air tight/pressurized cabin might not exhibit external smoke. Thanks for explaining how to keep risking lives ..
@@arcdestriumph586 A very emotionally charged response, I get it, fires and accidents are scary there's no denying that. But it is level-headed reactions that save lives, panicking and getting emotional during an accident will cost lives and already has so very very often before. Where did anyone here die/suffer injury due to F&R taking a few seconds to get into contact with the pilots in a non-emergency situation? Point to me the moment in the video where someone died/suffered injury? Like I said, if there was an uncontrolled fire, the pilots would've reported this as such and F&R would've already been on the frequency if the pilot requested that whilst in air. Just watch a few other in-flight reported fire cases and learn how the protocols work, there's a reason things work this way, no point in getting angry at me because you have no knowledge or understanding of said protocols.
It is neither the most efficient, nor evolved much since Sony first made commercial consumer versions of lithium batteries in the early 1990s (the tech and the idea had existed for donkey years). Nor is it exactly a joy for the kids or others (who are).illegally deployed in mining cadmium, lithium et al. Far better and much more efficient alternatives have already been around. About time the Homo sapiens start removing these messy things from public use.
Today we have much much safer batteries, than old li-on. However li-on are cheaper and little more dense with energy. Same thing can happen when we have battery left alone in home...
every fire in flight incident reminds me of Swiss 111.. the reaction and procedure of this American Airlines crew result from the lessons learned from Swis111 ... smoke or fire = start emergency descent and deviation to nearest suitable airport ASAP RIGHT NOW....get it on the ground as quickly as possible and do not concentrate on checklists, usual procedures or fuel dumping..everything else comes second..start to deviate, then deal with everything else
Also helping the American Airlines flight was being over the continental US where a pilot can point the nose down and even with both engines shut down have a choice of airports to glide down to. Swiss Air was dealing with a fire inches from the cockpit while over the ocean. There is a slim chance they could have survived even if they went straight to the nearest airport. Most likely result of trying for the nearest airport would have been crashing into a populated area. Swiss Air had very little chance to do anything to save the aircraft. I doubt even if someone was standing right next to the initial ignition event that it could have been detected and dealt with. Also, I doubt American Airlines would even listen to a sales presentation for an in flight entertainment system designed by a company in Vegas. They sure wouldn't let them alter the electrical system on the aircraft. Vegas has a connection with 2 aircraft crashes. The Swiss Air 111 and United 232 in Sioux Falls. The fan disc that failed and ripped through the hydraulic lines was made in Henderson, a suburb of Vegas. The fan disc manufacturing process had been improved after the disc in question was made but before the event. For a major international destination without a maintenance hanger, Vegas has more connection with aviation safety than it should.
Lithium Ion battery? Mmm, almost every device we use now a days has a lithium battery. That includes our phones, laptops and even our remotes for our cars.
for ATC/firefighters a weight is most useful, since that translates directly in energy. Volume units like gallons or liters are the next best units, they need a temperature correction for exact conversion. Minutes depend on the plane, the weight of the plane ... to convert those into a real number is not possible without all information, but in case of an emergency better than nothing, at least it allows an educated guess.
Technically the FAA requires pilots to provide "fuel remaining in minutes" in emergency situations, as this is more important for ATC vectoring. This is found at 6-3-2 (Obtaining Emergency Assistance) of the FAA Aeronautical Information Manual. However, as most emergencies don't involve low fuel, weight (in pounds / tons) is often preferred because fire-fighters need to know how big a boom/fire to prepare for, and accordingly whether they need to call in additional resources. If an emergency does involve low fuel, pilots will specifically declare "fuel emergency".
@@jajajaj666 I'd recon the only things worse are mid-air collision and being shot down by a missile (MH17 for instance) but yeah, fire is definitely up there as the worst that pilots can actually still try to save the plane. If you hit another plane mid-air you're likely doomed, same for being hit by an anti-air missile...
Incredible that they continue insisting about fuel in pounds while pilots are busy. They could simply google it or use their knowledge to covert instead of bothering pilots
Not the first time I've heard American ATCs pestering a pilot in distress to give "fuel in pounds", further adding to their workload. Even if they provided fuel in Kgs or tons, ATC comes back requesting fuel in pounds (!?)
The first two times ATC asked for fuel remaining, she clearly asked for "fuel in time", but both times it was captioned as "fuel in pounds." I know video captions for ATC recordings are always full of errors, but that one is more glaring twice and easily avoidable if you listen to check what you typed.
@@nickbedingfield1699 What you wrote is true for ATC's third request for fuel remaining, but I am referring to the first two requests for fuel, as I wrote. Listen to the first two requests from ATC at 1:01 and at 3:22, both times she says "fuel in time". On the third request at 3:37, she then says "our emergency services are requesting your fuel in pounds". But the captions got it wrong and read "fuel in pounds" all three of those times. It was glaringly obvious to me, but apparently isn't for everyone, based on the captions and your reply. It is more significant than most errors because after the pilot gives her the answer in time as she requested, she then goes back and asks for it differently in pounds, explaining that she's changing her request based on emergency services.
Lucky the battery was in carry on, could've been a lot worse if this person hadn't followed the rules and put their battery in their cargo hold luggage.
Pretty standard. They're testing the response. JAS-39NG are pretty good at handling any incursion though. Also, doing to Sweden what was done to Ukraine would be pointless, JAS-39NG is a STOL, they can take off from a bit of a straight stretch of road - even in the middle of nowhere. Norway though, where I'm from, has F-35. They're useless if they don't have a loooong runway. I hate that...
Lithium-ion batteries seem to be involved in a number of aircraft incidences. There seems to be a problem with these, even in cell phones.Why aren't they categorized as hazardous and therefore not allowed on board ??
It's a risk/reward tradeoff. The probability of a passenger's LiPo becoming dangerously faulty on an aircraft is extremely small, while the inconvenience to passengers of prohibiting taking their laptops, phones and other rechargeable electronics is high. Specific products with a high failure rate have been banned (e.g. the Samsung phone). Different airports/airlines seem to have different policies. In one airport I flew from (Istanbul) everything containing a LiPo had to go in cabin baggage, so I had to frantically transfer my laptop from my suitcase to my carry-on bag. On returning home, the departure airport (Manila) demanded the exact opposite - all batteries must travel in checked-in baggage, so another frantic transfer on the floor of by the check-in desk!
@@davemould4638 Note that LiPo is a different type of battery than Li-Ion and has different properties. LiPo tends to give a lot of heat and might produce a large flame for a few seconds while Li-Ion usually has vents that should prevent that stage.
That's often difficult for consumers to make a decision, as they're often not something that they have the information to make such a decision. Going back a few years, who would have expected an unmodified, off the shelf Samsung smartphone to be a ticking time bomb? Best option is to check obvious signs that the battery hasn't gone spicy, and NEVER allow them to go in the cargo hold - keep them in the passenger compartment where something can be done if they do ignite.
Annoying ground,A321 2 hour is about 5000 litre convert by yourself. Hahahaha Last moment, many captains used to do that. "Hi this is ground,good 2 know cap" . ggggggggggggg. But no not LiOn Powerbank Again,hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.
Those pilots are cool as can be despite having a fire no farther than 6' at their backs. Goes to show you that despite the best efforts of all experts in the field, lithium-ion batteries can be bombs at 35,000 feet! Scary stuff!
It is a very important distinction. Aircraft carry corpses reasonably frequently, especially during wartime and after a large disaster somewhere, and ATC are specifically requesting the number of *live* people on board. "Souls on board" is the quickest way to make the distinction.
All persons on board aircraft are called souls. It’s a military standard that translates to people alive. I used it in the Air Force. Just as sos became save our souls. It’s not the original meaning for SOS but souls is always used.
The pilots, grnd and fire all need remedial training in handling in flight fire. Two commercial pilots and neither can rough guess the fuel in pounds on board. And the clown talking about the GALLERY, just professionalism at its finest. Tell them all how great they are if you wish, but this went over like a Chinese fire drill.
While “decimal” is correct verbiage in many parts of the world, the U.S. AIM para 4-2-8 specifies the use of “point”. Therefore, they did use correct phraseology since this event took place in the U.S.
![Emergency Landing After Pilots Hear LOUD BANG on Takeoff [ATC audio]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/feYFdpeWBo8/mqdefault.jpg)
![ENGINE FIRE! Boeing 747 Returns to Miami After Dramatic Mid-Air Failure [ATC audio]](/img/n.gif)
This clip shows exactly why a read back is required. There were a few misreads that were corrected. Good job by all
Timestamps please, just in case.
Someone had too many mushrooms for lunch, or are the comms that bad all the time?
@@sailaab There was one slightly before plane landed.
@@freddymngadi6135 bad audio reception.
Thanks for sharing! These are great!
Every airport needs their ARFF to have the call sign Smoky lol
"Smoky Three" just rolls off the tongue, especially in that accent.
I was thinking the same haha
As long as OPS is the Bandit
Better then Crash-3 :)
@@TheSjuris Best comment today!!
GSO: "...I need souls on board and fuel in pounds..."
Pilot: "133 souls and two hours of fuel".
GSO: "...emergency services are requesting your fuel in pounds."
Pilot: "Yes ma'am, we have two hours of fuel and we'll be on.... two hours of fuel."
It sounded like the pilots were on oxygen, which would make sense given the situation. You don't want your pilots being affected by smoke or fumes. The mask does it harder to hear, though. Also, they were, after all, trying to fly an emergency approach at the time. Communicate is at the end of "Aviate, navigate, communicate" for a reason.
In the 7110 (the ATC bible), you're required to get remaining fuel in TIME during an emergency. (She was saying "time" but the caption says "pounds", until she asked specifically for pounds the second time). And the Crash Crew (emergency personnel) were the ones wondering how much fuel they have, in pounds. The pilots don't have to give that as it really doesn't matter as much for ATC. That's usually something the pilot will tell the emergency personnel themselves.
@@johnniesmiling8787 Agreed for the most part, but, regarding the last sentence, by the time pilots are communicating directly with the fire crew, isn't that usually a bit late for that information? The pilots usually don't talk to emergency personnel until they're already on the ground and stopped or slowed to taxi speed, do they?
@@vbscript2 Yep, definitely masked up. Would be SOP for smoke in the cockpit surely, and you can hear the tell-tale sound of the mask.... every firefighter knows it. For those that don't, listen for the "Darth Vader" sounding hiss as he inhales.
Im a bit confused by this actually. Aircraft time on fuel is based on a singular unit of speed at certain heights. So its no an accurate reading of amount of fuel. And anyway, these large aircraft state weight of fuel on the dash so why not simply always tell the weight instead as its not variable?
The Cessna that was told to wait N79549 used to belong to my father. He left it to me in his will. My step mother put him in a nursing home and sold the plane and his house that he left me as well before he passed away. Seeing the N number in the video brought back lots of memories, some good, some bad. Anyway enjoyed the video as always.
Thanks for sharing the connection big red, thanks for watching.
Your step mother sounds like a real nice lady. /s
Pilot was having a bad day. First he had this emergency to deal with then he did his PA to the passengers on ground frequency haha.
Yeah that was a good laugh lol
As an AA mechanic at a station that specializes in damaged Airbus, I'm watching wondering why we never heard of it and why didn't they bring it here. Then the pilot says it's in the bag. That explains everything. It's a passenger laptop and there is no aircraft damage. That's why we didn't hear about it.
I didnot knoe thst til
I askef my spn dony csarry liythumbatterird in ur bag
Yup
Airbus>Boeing, yes or no?
@@averye My comparison would be of eighties built Boeings compared to brand new Airbus. It wouldn't be fair, I will say that I love not greasing, changing, and rigging flight control cables.
I was the on call mechanic in GSO that was called out to this plane. Had to do that “smoke in the cabin” work card. I think the AA rep from Heico came over also “Art” I might still have that log page on cam scanner. 5 log book pages and the W/C is 17 pages.
This channel is so well done it is baffling. Nicely done.
Cheers Rick, glad you're enjoying the videos!
🤍💙👌🏽
This is the fourth one of these videos I've watched now. Subbed. Videos are extremely well done.
Also, I'm always surprised at how calm and collected ATC and pilots are even during an emergency.
Also, as soon as they said the fire was in a bag, my first guess was lithium ion battery fire in luggage. Indeed it was...
I always marvel at just how calm and professional everyone involved is during emergencies.
yeah this was handled like clockwork beautiful to see that even with fire in cabin (one of the worst things possible) pilots got the plane down ATC and ground control got everyone coordinated it sounded like the flight attendents dealt with the fire itself and the airport firefighters were right there should things go wrong.
Panic will not help anyone, and won't increase your chance of survival. Fight the problem until it is solved, or .....
They have no alternative but to remain calm
@@malahammer I disagree. There is always the option/possibility of a crew just losing their minds and mentally shutting down. We just don't often find enough pieces of the black boxes to hear about them.
that was not an emergency though lol
Love the attention to detail on every aircraft moving in the area even if they don't affect the audio at the moment 👌👍
SMOKY's gotta be the cutest radio handle ever for a fire brigade. So adorable!
GREAT video production, no BS, no intros, no "buy my VPN" stuff. Simple, clear and visual. Thank you!
Handle of SMOKY + that guy's accent is a winning combination. I'd feel safe as a pilot hearing them as the ARFFS chief. Thanks very much for the kind comment. 🙂
I’m sure he was more mortified about doing his PA on the ground frequency 😅
You can hear it in the "sorry". 😁
Gave us a chance to hear how calm and almost matter-of-fact his voice was for the passengers' benefit, though.
Rear galley directly behind the cockpit, never heard of that aircraft configuration before.😀
This aircraft is configured with a wormhole through the spacetime continuum for additional cabin crew efficiency.
I fly the 737. Didn’t realize the rear galley was behind the cockpit on this type. 🤪
@@73av8r5 ah, see that's the 737, this is an A321, lol
Yeah... the gallery. You know? Where all the paintings are hung in the back!
If you can, book a seat near the gallery - you'll be the first to enjoy the artwork when you reach cruise! ✈️
"We don't have any souls on board or fuel" left would be a sobering comment to hear out of context in this situation lol
Favorite part of the production was when you pulled the localizer after they reported it OTS. LOL
Gotta get the details right!
"Advise, fire in the rear ... *gallery*?"
Now this is why you should never put batteries in your baggage to be checked in the haul. This could have a catastrophic consequences if that battery had been in the cargo bay. Luckily this time no harm. Great animations!
Well, a battery fire isn't an issue in the cargo hold. There's a fire detection system there as well and smoke won't be pulled into the cabin, so it's a fairly "save" situation which can be handled by the crew.
Cheap laptops and cheap chinese li-on batteries. This is obviously passenger fault.
@@RubenKelevra Except for the aircraft systems that may run under the passenger deck and above the hold. If you have a large fire in that area, which could easily happen if a battery fire broke out, then it could damage critical systems which would then lead to bad things.
There was a FedEx 747? (IIRC) which crashed somewhere in the middle east because a battery fire broke out in the hold, then grew and damaged critical control systems.
(Mentour Pilot did a good vid on it)
And lastly, you can't just vent to stop a battery fire as they are their own fuel source... Very dangerous situation to have in the hold.
@@RubenKelevra this is one of the worst takes i have seen in a while. Go look up how a lithium fire looks. They are almost impossible to extinguish and can easily grow quite large. The fire will also definitely spread. If it's in the luggage compartment, it's probably in a suitcase with clothes.
Lithium fires have brought down planes before.
@@TheSwanies lithium fires are only dangerous if there are large batteries involved. Small batteries are hardly an issue.
Have a look at the US: How many commercial airliners have "gone down" in the last 30 years, and how many lithium batteries are carried on each flight?
Yeah. Zero and probably 3 per pax.
So stop spreading nonsense fears.
This was a very professional, well organized response by everyone involved. I am seriously impressed. I do have to ask why the initial emergency callout wasn't included here.
Not every frequency is captured and archived. Coverage for enroute controllers tends to be more difficult to source than for terminal controllers.
ATC got the location of the galley fire wrong. The rear galley is not behind the cockpit as broadcast. ATC should have asked jet's intentions without prompting. This is a good training scenario.
@@miked5539 A comment above said it was a laptop computer that actually started the fire. Hence the pilot saying to check the bag.
@@miked5539 The rear galley is, in fact, behind the flight deck. About 100 feet behind it at the other end of the cabin. - haha
Thanks for the vids, but may I ask why we seem to never get the initial emergency communication from the pilots from this channel?
It depends on what audio is available for inclusion. Coverage for enroute controllers tends to be more difficult to source than for terminal controllers.
@@AirTrafficVisualised thanks for the info, keep up the great work. Your channel goes far beyond than the others. Really appreciate them.
Such courteous personell! Love the nice responses from the ATC.
I thought ATC was tone deaf to the Captain having his hands full. "Can you give me pounds..pounds.. pounds" He said 2 hours of Fuel remaining lady... Have one of the staff in your air conditioned lounge pull up a gallons/per/hour at cruise/chart on the Airbus and you have a solid approximation... A little busy in the Aircraft that's On Fire. A PRO Fireman would have a Chart handy converting Fuel Hours to Pounds of each aircraft he might encounter.. the "Aw Shucks" model "can you convert that for me Mr. Pilot" isn't professional at all. Have tools that DECREASE the need for Pilot attention during an Emergency.
SMOKY# is a great call-sign.
3 quick syllables instead of 6 with tiny pauses between each letter. Also instantly memorable/distinguishable even in an emergency to pilots and ATCs that they're fire crew.
Smoky3? That's foreshadowing if i've ever seen it.
Smoke/fire in cabin, that's about as scary as it gets.
haha the classic "make an announcement on frequency instead". i've definitely done that before. understandable though given what just happened
Private pilot here. How come it always seems like a clown show coordinating communication with ARF? Often seems like an afterthought. Also why is there often confusion about fuel remaining time vs pounds?
I can't answer as to the comm issue, but as for the fuel, since different aircraft carry differing amounts of, and consume fuel at wildly different rates due to so many variables, giving a report in time remaining is meaningless to the firefighters (who use pounds to get a accurate measure of gallons remaining.)
How much fuel is involved in a potential post landing (or crash) fire determines the level of firefighting response and resources needed.
@@turbokatzenburg5732 makes complete sense. Seems that asking for both would be a good idea
RH and AG mentioned that the emergency information checklist asks for a lot, the SOB and Fuel is the primary information needed. Don't forget that many controllers are not pilots and don't always get the airplane terminal (gallery vs galley).
@@turbokatzenburg5732 I think asking in time is more for calculating how much the A/C has flown and how much time he has left, for example if a pilot has 2hours of fuel and has been doing circuits for 1:30 hours the atc could warn the pilot if for some reason the pilot doesn't notice which is highly doubtful, and in my airport they say during an emergency we need to take fuel both in time and pounds
@@markmarkplace I agree with you, asking for both is the best way to go.
Excellent team work and coordination by all. ATC was great.
I hadn't listened both situations, the ATC / Emergency aircraft and ATC / ARFF almost simultaneously. Now I get why ATC asks something
Atc made a minor mistake. The aircraft was an Airbus. The pilots would have to dig out a conversion worksheet to convert from liters to pounds, unless airbus made a change to the flight computers giving the flight crew the fuel information in pounds.
@@drmayeda1930 wouldn't be that hard... get your weight in kilos and convert to pounds. The liter isn't a measurement of weight.
My worst nightmare. Well done, Smoky, ATC, and Flight Crew.
I just lrarned something Do not carry lithum batteries on airplanr cause smoke emergency landg
I feel like everything something like this happens pilots always report time in fuel remaining rather than pounds. I mean 2 hours Fuel means nothing because 2 hours is dependent on fuel burn which people on the ground have no idea of.
2 hours can mean everything when it’s a matter of endurance. Pilots are trained and required to report to ATC in endurance, not pounds. ARF always seems to want the quantity in pounds, so there tends to be a communication disconnect.
@@jpfurnari5056 It also depends on what the fuel gauge reads, pounds, liters, or gallons. I hear there is some confusion about how the gauges should be standardized, or if there should be dual readings. Not a real pilot here just an FB observer.
I expected a mention/confirmation of mayday when he switched to tower.
Smokey3 was like, 'We had trouble hearing you, on account of the nap.'
This is EXACTLY, to the letter, the reason that most airlines limit the maximum size and maximum number of lithium-ion batteries you are allowed to bring on the aircraft, both in checked bags and in carry-on luggage.
I checked the regulations, and made sure to purchase so that my things are well within those limits.
From my understanding, the limits at the time I purchased my USB battery banks was something around 100 watt-hours.
Now, lithium-ion battery banks are commonly available with much higher stored energy ratings than that, but I only take those when I'm camping, and when I'm camping I travel by automobile. The USB battery banks that I take on the aircraft are within the stored energy limits and always from a reputable brand, with as many battery protection systems on them (without duplicating function) as is practical (and I can't think of a situation where it's not practical to have all of them).
The ones I buy are Anker brand, and I've never had a problem with them meeting or exceeding their specifications.
Never buy one sight-unseen from some Chinese brand you've never heard of before, not without doing your research.
Not only are you likely not going to get the full capacity they claim, the thing might even be actually dangerous to you, your devices, or even the aircraft you might fly on.
Oh and do yourself a big favor, never leave anything with a lithium-ion battery in it inside your vehicle in the hot sun.
They're very sensitive to high temperatures, and the result of exceeding their maximum temperature is what is known as "thermal runaway", basically the energy stored in the battery gets turned into heat within the battery instead of electricity, which accelerates that process, quickly leading to the lithium-ion battery bursting and starting a fire, just like what happened in this video.
Basically, if you wouldn't leave a tin of instant biscuits in the car for as long as you plan to be away, don't leave something with a lithium-ion battery in that car either. If you can't put it someplace cooler than "inside the vehicle", take it with you, or leave it in the car but also leave the car running with the AC on (I know, gas prices these days make that not a favorable option, but it's better than your car burning to the ground isn't it?).
It's not just an airline limit. At least here in the U.S., the FAA has legal limits, though sometimes airlines impose even more strict limits than the FAA requires. The FAA does not limit the number of lithium ion batteries that a passenger may carry if they are all each individually under 100 W-hr, but they limit to 2 over that limit. Li ion batteries over 160 W-hr are not allowed at all. Also, all of them must be in carry-on luggage only, specifically so that they can be handled if they do catch on fire, such as in this situation. They don't have easy access to the cargo hold during flight. Much easier to both detect and handle a battery fire in the passenger cabin where it can be extinguished and contained in a fire bag.
This is also why anything you order that has a lithium battery in it will be shipped to you over ground, not by air. Cargo flights have crashed before because of thermal runway in lithium batteries and they were banned from air cargo after that.
I was flying from France back to the USA in 2009 and some IDIOT decided to pop in the lavatory for a quick smoke. When you're six miles up and over the Atlantic Ocean and the smoke alarms go off, it's a pretty uneasy feeling. The idiot passenger got to deplane first. Had people in suits and uniforms waiting for him at the gate
It wasn't a problem here, but some ATCs insist on remaining fuel being given in a specific unit: pounds, kilos, gallons, etc, rather than hours. In an emergency situation the pilots are under a lot of pressure and don't have time to do a conversion. The ATC should accept the fuel remaining in whatever unit is given.
Having listened to a lot of these situations it seems like there's almost always miscommunication when requesting fuel remaining. It might be a good idea to train pilots to give fuel remaining in both time and weight.
I think it'd still save time when the alternative is a back-and-forth clarification or having to ask the crew (who are busy thinking about other things, such as their emergency) multiple times.
@@AirTrafficVisualised The pilot is busy and should only be required to give the amount in whatever unit he has immediately available, either from gauges or in his mind. "Training" him to do an extra task isn't reasonable.
@@AirTrafficVisualised No... ATC and Fire should have a handbook that converts Hours to Pounds for every passenger aircraft they might encounter. Everyone on the ground should be EASING pilot responsibilities.. Not giving them more... That's called being a prepared/professional that's genuinely interested in seeing those onboard live by making the Pilot's task simpler. I carried HAZMAT qualifications for my job .. I had a handbook that allowed me to access risk of any hazardous chemical in under 10 seconds.. of which there are 1000's. The major Airlines don't use 1000 different planes. Very easily done. All procedures and toolkits should follow one mission .. save lives.
@@arcdestriumph586 Also, the exact amount (in whatever unit) is not really important anyways. It's more a question of "expect a huge fireball" or "don't worry too much about it". "2 hours" on a plane designed for regional hops is "rather full", whereas on a transatlantic flight it's "almost empty".
@@stephanweinberger Not true ...gear can rip into wing tanks after an on ground incident.. gushing fuel out .. No fireball from a high impact crash. Prolonged Fuel Burn danger sequence intitiated. Dale Earnhard Jr.'s Citation Crash and fuel burn a good example.
On listening to a lot of these Mayday communications between ATC and the aircraft, it seems like the amount of fuel on board is a bit of a bugaboo. Some give it in pounds, some give it in time, and It seems like ATC and the Mayday aircraft are never on the same page. It seems like using a universal fuel language would simplify things for both the ATC and the crews of the aircraft at a stressful time.
every video they ask for the fuel in pounds. every video... they give the fuel in hours lol.
i hate when they use "personnel" on board. I much prefer "souls" on board as with an emergency the chance that they be all there is left is greatly heightened.
The Lithium-ion battery strikes again. Those batteries should be outlawed.
since seconds matter for fire on board; i'm surprised that fire engine communication with pilots is always a struggle.... i've seen other videos where they were talking on different channels, couldn't understand them, etc... sounds like there's room for improvement on clear and quick communication to be established.
its like that for safety for multiple reasons. the most common is to give the FD the ability to talk to each other without disrupting the ground control. a less common reason is so that if the plane has a threat onboard the field teams can coordinate with a better chance that the airplane is not receiving the information (ie there is a wanted person that has boarded the plane and they are holding push back till the pd can remove him)
Exactly.. all the frequency hopping is sure to cost human lives.. it's a horseshxt procedure. Keep it simple.
@@arcdestriumph586 If the fire & rescue personnel can see flames coming from the aircraft they won't wait and just start extinguishing it right away, pilots communication or not. In this case specific instructions/requests were needed for a non-threatening situation. If the bag was catching fire uncontrollably, the pilot would've declared this before the landing attempt and fire & rescue would've handled by protocol.
Name one example where a life was lost due to F&R using a different frequency?
@@someguy4915 So.. You think seconds don't count in an enclosed space with lots of people on board.. and a fire? You want to ease the workload of someone in an emergency/under stress.. Not add to the "to do" list. An air tight/pressurized cabin might not exhibit external smoke. Thanks for explaining how to keep risking lives ..
@@arcdestriumph586 A very emotionally charged response, I get it, fires and accidents are scary there's no denying that. But it is level-headed reactions that save lives, panicking and getting emotional during an accident will cost lives and already has so very very often before.
Where did anyone here die/suffer injury due to F&R taking a few seconds to get into contact with the pilots in a non-emergency situation? Point to me the moment in the video where someone died/suffered injury?
Like I said, if there was an uncontrolled fire, the pilots would've reported this as such and F&R would've already been on the frequency if the pilot requested that whilst in air.
Just watch a few other in-flight reported fire cases and learn how the protocols work, there's a reason things work this way, no point in getting angry at me because you have no knowledge or understanding of said protocols.
excellent animation, thanks
Hi, those animations are a step above - great work.
The fire people seem confused the whole time.. wtf
Great work on the part of all the aircrew and folks on the ground at my hometown airport! 🙂
Sounds like smoky3 had a heavy night.
It is neither the most efficient, nor evolved much since Sony first made commercial consumer versions of lithium batteries in the early 1990s (the tech and the idea had existed for donkey years).
Nor is it exactly a joy for the kids or others (who are).illegally deployed in mining cadmium, lithium et al.
Far better and much more efficient alternatives have already been around.
About time the Homo sapiens start removing these messy things from public use.
👩🚒 SMOKY3 to the rescue!
10-15 minutes is a long time for a fire isn’t?
Thanks for the epilogue. And what an amazing coordination of all involved.
im just glad theres not a fire in the gallery
So was there an actual fire or was it just an odor?
Today we have much much safer batteries, than old li-on. However li-on are cheaper and little more dense with energy. Same thing can happen when we have battery left alone in home...
every fire in flight incident reminds me of Swiss 111.. the reaction and procedure of this American Airlines crew result from the lessons learned from Swis111 ... smoke or fire = start emergency descent and deviation to nearest suitable airport ASAP RIGHT NOW....get it on the ground as quickly as possible and do not concentrate on checklists, usual procedures or fuel dumping..everything else comes second..start to deviate, then deal with everything else
Amen get that plsne down asap.put the 9thers on hoold
Probably wouldn't have mattered in the case of SR111, but their were changes to procedures.
Also helping the American Airlines flight was being over the continental US where a pilot can point the nose down and even with both engines shut down have a choice of airports to glide down to.
Swiss Air was dealing with a fire inches from the cockpit while over the ocean. There is a slim chance they could have survived even if they went straight to the nearest airport. Most likely result of trying for the nearest airport would have been crashing into a populated area.
Swiss Air had very little chance to do anything to save the aircraft. I doubt even if someone was standing right next to the initial ignition event that it could have been detected and dealt with.
Also, I doubt American Airlines would even listen to a sales presentation for an in flight entertainment system designed by a company in Vegas. They sure wouldn't let them alter the electrical system on the aircraft.
Vegas has a connection with 2 aircraft crashes. The Swiss Air 111 and United 232 in Sioux Falls. The fan disc that failed and ripped through the hydraulic lines was made in Henderson, a suburb of Vegas. The fan disc manufacturing process had been improved after the disc in question was made but before the event.
For a major international destination without a maintenance hanger, Vegas has more connection with aviation safety than it should.
@@garybrummet8909 that’s still debated to this day
Lithium Ion battery? Mmm, almost every device we use now a days has a lithium battery. That includes our phones, laptops and even our remotes for our cars.
When ATC asks for fuel remaining do they want lbs, gallons, or minutes?
for ATC/firefighters a weight is most useful, since that translates directly in energy. Volume units like gallons or liters are the next best units, they need a temperature correction for exact conversion. Minutes depend on the plane, the weight of the plane ... to convert those into a real number is not possible without all information, but in case of an emergency better than nothing, at least it allows an educated guess.
Technically the FAA requires pilots to provide "fuel remaining in minutes" in emergency situations, as this is more important for ATC vectoring. This is found at 6-3-2 (Obtaining Emergency Assistance) of the FAA Aeronautical Information Manual.
However, as most emergencies don't involve low fuel, weight (in pounds / tons) is often preferred because fire-fighters need to know how big a boom/fire to prepare for, and accordingly whether they need to call in additional resources. If an emergency does involve low fuel, pilots will specifically declare "fuel emergency".
There are few things worse than a fire onboard an aircraft.
Like?
Explosive diarrhea onboard and toilets are occupied
@@jajajaj666 I'd recon the only things worse are mid-air collision and being shot down by a missile (MH17 for instance) but yeah, fire is definitely up there as the worst that pilots can actually still try to save the plane. If you hit another plane mid-air you're likely doomed, same for being hit by an anti-air missile...
All good but can't help thinking the fire service need to do some more pratice...and/or get better radios.
what is wrong with these people? personnel onboard? gallery? wow word mistakes you can't afford to cause confusion in an emergency.
This is pretty cool to watch, well done!
Lithium-polymer would have been even more exciting than lithium-ion; per chance we should try that next time. Cheers!
Lithium ion no bueno. Anyone remember the Boeing 787 debacle regarding this type of batteries ? I do.
The many videos show me that, when mayday is acknowledged, devoting one ATC controller to the situation is a time saving attribute.
Cool calm and professional.
Is an NTSB Report allready published?
Everyone sounds calm! Impressive.
I wonder what brand computer burned?
Needed to look at the date a second time at the end there to check if it was a Note 7 that caught fire on bord :p
This happened on our America airlines flight to Germany someone phone caught on fire 🔥
Smoke in the cabin while aloft is one of the worst things. They are so difficult to control and they could be fast or slow. Good Job to all!
Wow, amazing production quality. The other 2 channels got nothing on this.
🙄
A lithium battery caught fire. Wow.
Incredible that they continue insisting about fuel in pounds while pilots are busy. They could simply google it or use their knowledge to covert instead of bothering pilots
Not the first time I've heard American ATCs pestering a pilot in distress to give "fuel in pounds", further adding to their workload. Even if they provided fuel in Kgs or tons, ATC comes back requesting fuel in pounds (!?)
This was almost an exact copy of Swiss Air 1111
In all the videos I have seen, I have never once heard a pilot correctly respond with the fuel in pounds when asked, even repeatedly.
Pounds is a silly measurement unit anyways :)
The first two times ATC asked for fuel remaining, she clearly asked for "fuel in time", but both times it was captioned as "fuel in pounds." I know video captions for ATC recordings are always full of errors, but that one is more glaring twice and easily avoidable if you listen to check what you typed.
Atc and smokey both asked for fuel in pounds, the pilot replied in fuel in time . So Tony m check you facts before you give a bollocking
@@nickbedingfield1699 What you wrote is true for ATC's third request for fuel remaining, but I am referring to the first two requests for fuel, as I wrote. Listen to the first two requests from ATC at 1:01 and at 3:22, both times she says "fuel in time". On the third request at 3:37, she then says "our emergency services are requesting your fuel in pounds".
But the captions got it wrong and read "fuel in pounds" all three of those times. It was glaringly obvious to me, but apparently isn't for everyone, based on the captions and your reply. It is more significant than most errors because after the pilot gives her the answer in time as she requested, she then goes back and asks for it differently in pounds, explaining that she's changing her request based on emergency services.
These are cool
Lucky the battery was in carry on, could've been a lot worse if this person hadn't followed the rules and put their battery in their cargo hold luggage.
It always starts at LGA 😂
Some news: airspace incursion of Swedish airspace by 4 Russian jet fighters, 2 days ago.
Pretty standard. They're testing the response. JAS-39NG are pretty good at handling any incursion though. Also, doing to Sweden what was done to Ukraine would be pointless, JAS-39NG is a STOL, they can take off from a bit of a straight stretch of road - even in the middle of nowhere.
Norway though, where I'm from, has F-35. They're useless if they don't have a loooong runway. I hate that...
@@boringpolitician Norway's F-35 is the non VTOL version?
@@09shadowjet - VERY non-vtol.
Lithium-ion batteries seem to be involved in a number of aircraft incidences. There seems to be a problem with these, even in cell phones.Why aren't they categorized as hazardous and therefore not allowed on board ??
It's a risk/reward tradeoff. The probability of a passenger's LiPo becoming dangerously faulty on an aircraft is extremely small, while the inconvenience to passengers of prohibiting taking their laptops, phones and other rechargeable electronics is high. Specific products with a high failure rate have been banned (e.g. the Samsung phone). Different airports/airlines seem to have different policies. In one airport I flew from (Istanbul) everything containing a LiPo had to go in cabin baggage, so I had to frantically transfer my laptop from my suitcase to my carry-on bag. On returning home, the departure airport (Manila) demanded the exact opposite - all batteries must travel in checked-in baggage, so another frantic transfer on the floor of by the check-in desk!
@@davemould4638 Note that LiPo is a different type of battery than Li-Ion and has different properties. LiPo tends to give a lot of heat and might produce a large flame for a few seconds while Li-Ion usually has vents that should prevent that stage.
Excellent - - - thanks ! !
love the graphics!!
👍✈👍
Cool as a cucumber...
Crappy LI-ion batteries threatening an entire passenger flight. Be careful what you buy; quality is critical.
That's often difficult for consumers to make a decision, as they're often not something that they have the information to make such a decision. Going back a few years, who would have expected an unmodified, off the shelf Samsung smartphone to be a ticking time bomb? Best option is to check obvious signs that the battery hasn't gone spicy, and NEVER allow them to go in the cargo hold - keep them in the passenger compartment where something can be done if they do ignite.
"It's in the bag" is the cool thing here. A very clever innovation. These are specially made pouches that contain the burning failed device.
Annoying ground,A321 2 hour is about 5000 litre convert by yourself.
Hahahaha Last moment, many captains used to do that. "Hi this is ground,good 2 know cap" . ggggggggggggg.
But no not LiOn Powerbank Again,hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.
A little sloppy on ground end. Confusion and they should have immediately inspected aircraft upon landing. Just my HO.
Those pilots are cool as can be despite having a fire no farther than 6' at their backs. Goes to show you that despite the best efforts of all experts in the field, lithium-ion batteries can be bombs at 35,000 feet! Scary stuff!
Someone was vaping in the cabin!
Who the fuck is "Roger"‽
It always scares me when they say, "Souls on board". "People on board"
sounds less fatal to me.
It is a very important distinction. Aircraft carry corpses reasonably frequently, especially during wartime and after a large disaster somewhere, and ATC are specifically requesting the number of *live* people on board. "Souls on board" is the quickest way to make the distinction.
I find "souls on board " somehow comforting.
@@davemould4638 Thank you for the explanation.
All persons on board aircraft are called souls. It’s a military standard that translates to people alive. I used it in the Air Force. Just as sos became save our souls. It’s not the original meaning for SOS but souls is always used.
The pilots, grnd and fire all need remedial training in handling in flight fire. Two commercial pilots and neither can rough guess the fuel in pounds on board. And the clown talking about the GALLERY, just professionalism at its finest. Tell them all how great they are if you wish, but this went over like a Chinese fire drill.
That announcement of one one niner point one is incorrect. Should be one one niner decimal one. Please us correct alphabet.
While “decimal” is correct verbiage in many parts of the world, the U.S. AIM para 4-2-8 specifies the use of “point”. Therefore, they did use correct phraseology since this event took place in the U.S.
Jesus, FORCED commercial @1:28 in. If you want a successful channel, you would stop adding the commercials in the middle of the video.
Hmmm. I didn't see any commercial while watching this on my kindle.
@@karend1577 Watched it on the PC
The channel creator has no control over when ads are placed. TH-cam controls that.
Seems that the radio of the firefighters needs to upgraded. They obviously could not hear as well as we did.