Inferno of Unknown Origin (Air Canada Flight 797) - DISASTER BREAKDOWN
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 11 июн 2021
- If you found this video interesting be sure to Subscribe as there are new videos every Saturday. This video went out to my Patrons on Patreon 48 hours before going out publicly on RUclips. You can join the Disaster Breakdown Patreon from £3 per month here: / disasterbreakdown
THIS VIDEO CONTAINS AN ATC RECORDING.
Twitter: / chloe_howiecb
Personal/Music Channel: / @chloehowie
A fire on a plane is one of the most horrifying scenarios in the skies. On June 2nd, 1983, Air Canada flight 797, a DC9 caught fire mid-flight originating out of the aft Lavatory. The source of the fire is still not understood to this day.
If you found this video interesting be sure to Subscribe as there are new videos every Saturday. This video went out to my Patrons on Patreon 48 hours before going out publicly on RUclips. You can join the Disaster Breakdown Patreon from £3 per month here: www.patreon.com/DisasterBreakdown
What if the circuit breaker short circuited and that sparked the fire😳
"We have no heading anymore" ATC: "Can you give me a heading?" No, no they cannot anymore.
You could hear the annoyance in his voice too
bruh
Legit I would've yelled at that point
It comes down to giving the "Last known heading" and even the parameters, like "Our last known was turning left passing 090..."
IF someone has an analogue watch, you CAN point the hour hand toward the sun, and "Due South" is about halfway between that hour hand and "12-o'clock" (OR 1-o'clock for Daylight Savings) in the Northern Hemisphere... SO you CAN estimate. It's an increase on work-load and less than precise, but it's also do-able...
You DO have to remember that it works "opposite" in the Southern Hemisphere, giving "Due North" instead of "Due South"...
In a plane, where you might be out of visual cues, it's worth knowing because it BEATS THE HELL out of "nothing". ;o)
@@gnarthdarkanen7464 then again, if you have no instruments and are in the middle of clouds but ATC has you on primary radar, they probably know where you are heading better than you do.
Captain Cameron sounded so done when they asked him for heading AGAIN despite him saying his instruments had all failed. I get that, man. I really do.
You also lost all your reading while having a fire on your jetliner?
@@kevinn4038 No, having to repeatedly explain to people the same thing over and over again.
@@kevinn4038no- what they meant was that they understood that some people still ask the same question when you answered them already.
They have an analog compass. He could have used that for the heading.
10:35 - the pilot's response was one of the most relatable things I've ever heard in one of these videos before. 😌
The NTSB was initially too harsh on the captain, and a petition by the pilot's union actually got the NTSB to pull some of their punches in the revised report.
For those wondering why the captain didn't descend immediately, he was never told about the nature of the fire, and until the master caution light lit up, he thought it was a bin fire caused by a cigarette. On the Louisville possibility, pilots believe that they didn't have to space to descend for a safe landing there, and Cincinnati itself was a tough landing to do.
The plane itself was actually a lemon. It was written up numerous times in maintenance, and even suffered a decompression of the rear bulkhead a few years prior. Luckily only a food cart was lost, but they had to rewire so many things. I wouldn't be surprised if they botched the repair. Also, on the CVR, a few minutes before the circuit breakers popped, electrical crackling was heard by the CVR (but impossible to be heard by the pilots). However, the investigators couldn't determine if the crackling was a sign of the start of the fire or merely an effect of a fire already started.
Investigating smoke and a hot lavatory door by three crew for 20 minutes while not descending to land immediately?
Life was different back in the day. Cigarette smokers were always starting small fires in random places. I remember my neighbor set his bed on fire by dozing off with a lit cigarette in his hand. We had a good laugh about it later. He did not stop smoking in bed.
Airplane crew back in the day were used to putting out small fires and making no mention of it.
Yes let’s get everyone to confirm and look at the smoke and jack around for 20 minutes before we think about getting on the ground or even letting the crew know.
Good lord.
Seriously WTF!?
This is why the "Shouldn't be scared ti fly because it safer than driving" argument doesn't work for me. Humans, make mistakes. Some are even blundering and repeated and fatal. If something goes wrong in the air, things are almost always disastrous
@Schlomo Baconberg Yea, and that doesn't mean very much at all. I know like 5 people, none of which travel. Statistics don't mean shit WHEN the plane crashes. You can say millions fly every year with few deaths. But when one does crash, typically most on board die
@Schlomo Baconberg SO NOBODY at all dies ever, is what you are saying. Because it Can happen, at any time, for many different reasons. So you can't know, who will or will not person with 100% certainty. If you could, there would be no accidents
Actually mile for mile driving and flying are about the same. The reason you are less likely to die flying than driving is because most people drive far more than they fly.
"we have no instruments"
"can you give me a heading"
I feel like the ATC dude did not have his coffee that morning
They had an analog compass. He could have used that for the heading to help ATC
The only reason so many of you seem to "know" that you should get the plane to the ground as quickly as possible when any sort of fire or smoke is detected is BECAUSE of the lessons that were learned from this flight.
Common sense is based on the collective experience, and the collective experience at that time said that they could deal with it the way they did. Good thing Capt. Cameron's experiences gave him the wherewithal to ensure that the plane was actually able to land instead of crashing in the first place... There is no question that this incident was tragic, and loss of life is always painful and regrettable, especially when pilot error or manufacturing defects are to blame. That being said, I would be curious to know how many peoples' lives have been saved as a result from the changes to aviation safety standards that you all seem to think are "common sense" and "obvious". I doubt any one of those people would have wished that this incident had not happened until their own flight because they think that their pilot probably would have done a better job that day. So at least this way those 23 souls lost did not die in vain.
We are learning by these videos, so picturing the mistake is essential to reach that aim. If our human nature and common sense would be similar to the way it was then we have more difficult task to stress more and more that this is wrong to be done, so that it may defeat the natural reaction.
For a different example on how much you can get by having good safety standards, look into Formula 1 crashes. There were horrible crashes up to the 80s, and after that multiple bits of safety gear were made mandatory ... and the deaths and injuries plummeted. Compare the accidents of Niki Lauda and Romain Grosjean for a major difference.
This crew wasted a lot of time. No reason not to have initiated an emergency descent while evaluating the fire.
Smoke/Smell in the cabin is not that unusual, and can be from a number of sources. Most often a non critical issue with the AC Packs. The problem is there are a lot of tight and reasonably sealed spaces in an airplane for a fire to sit and smolder. while being very hard to detect. Detection gets even harder on a DC9 as the lavatories each butt up against the engines. Which are mounted to the main fuselage. Needless to say reports of strange smells, smoke, weird noises, etc were not unusual for the airplane. To the point where you really couldn't declare an emergency for every smell in a DC-9. You'd never get off the ground. (in hindsight that might have been the better option. The DC-9 holds the distinction of having somewhere around 30% of it's production run lost or damaged beyond repair in incidents)
@@andrewtaylor940 Yeah, a lot of people just have the benefit of hindsight with a lot of these investigations.
It would've not made any difference, during the 80s smoke was common in the cabin due to smoke.
Why would he not alert Indianapolis of a potential fire? He had sufficient evidence making the risk calculation warranted no?
Too much ego that they would handle it themselves and not get any assistance. Much like not answering ATC when asked what type of aircraft it was etc. Too much time? That may have returned some very useful info much earlier on.
@@kenmore01 Is there any sort of precedent or unsaid rule that you must not report emergencies until absolutely sure? naturally I always get the sense in these scenarios there must be SOMETHING that stops them from doing the seemingly obvious but then again, humans are fallible
@@CYMotorsport I don't know aviation regulations, I just fly frequently. I'm just speaking from a sense of what makes sense to me. I would doubt it, but I can understand the idea that the flight crew wants to at least know the facts as best they can before reporting them. That said, I imagine they are distracted and as you say, humans are fallible. There seemed to be plenty of time in this scenario, however, to start taking safety measures. I just thought the captain's ego just wanted everyone to leave them alone and allow them to handle it, which they did not, unfortunately.
According to the Mayday episode, fires in the washroom from smoking were common back then. So they didn't think it was that serious as first
I’ve always wondered about that. But I think part of it is pilot training. They only report precisely what the observed condition is. Ie “Smoke in Cabin”. They do not assume or report fire unless flames are directly spotted. And even then they seem slow on declaring a fire emergency inside the cabin. They will much more readily declare an external engine fire. IIRC even the Valujet fire that hit the Everglades only ever got as far as reporting smoke. Even while the cabin crew was screaming that the floor was on fire and collapsing.
It may be they are trying to insure specific types of response from Fire Rescue? But having worked AFR for years, we were never quite certain what exactly they are trying to tell us. And the Pilots could be infuriating. Some will try and micromanage the situation. “Please have then bring an ambulance” Really dude? Emergency Services have their own response protocols, not unlike the pilots. With lots of pre plans for almost anything. All you need do is give us fuel and souls on board. That lets us know how many of what type units we need staged for your disaster.
There is really great episode/short documentary about this flight. Captain Cameron was downright heroic in being able to even land that aircraft. They had no instruments, and only a 'horizon' to work with. And he felt significant, nearly debilitating guilt afterwards when he was told the final fatality count from the accident. In fact, you can see him visibly holding back tears with a shaky voice when he speaks about it. It's utterly heartbreaking how much he blamed himself. Also, it was not an explosion that happened after they landed, it was a 'flash fire' that shot through the cabin in seconds. Which is why the aircraft looks like a burnt shell with part of the roof missing. We learned about this incident extensively in flight attendant training. We learned how rapidly a fire can spread and overcome you.
The ban on Halon extinguishers pretty much everywhere except for aviation was the tendency of halon to destroy the ozone layer. The amounts set free in the remaining legal use are so minimal that the benefits of the extinguishing capabilites outweigh the potential damage to the ozone layer, whereas on the ground other alternatives work well enough and can be made available in larger quantities easily.
Also, we shouldn't ignore the fact that there is patron named Flaminghotcheetosmakemybutthurt.
say again plz?
With “Where are my cheetos” coming up after it 😂
I did not know that Stan Rogers died in a airplane fire. I love his work and its tragic what happened to him. Its a shame that they didn't land the plane as so as they detected smoke. But i also wonder if landing actually caused it to get worst in the first place. The lower altitude might of allowed to fire to spread more as it now had more oxygen to feed off of.
I'm unsure if the lower altitude would have played that big of part given the cabin is pressurized. I believe the O2 difference is 4%, so it's not tons compared to higher altitudes. Fresh supplies of O2 (opening the door originally, opening the window - very stupid, and opening the emergency exits upon landing would have all played a far larger role in the acceleration of the fire.
Probably, if they had just left it alone after realizing they couldn't see a fire and decide to land, it would have limited the original fuel supply and maybe slowed it down a little. They do believe some people where already incapcitated from smoke at the time of landing. IIRC, in the Mayday episode, someone close to him said he was still in his seat at time of flashover, sadly. At the time, there were more things on planes that produced toxic fumes along with just plain smoke that were deadly fairly quickly.
I had no idea this was how Stan passed. What an awful way to go! Well I'm going to be sad now.
@@BitterWillow From what I heard, he went back to try and help other people out of the plane. While sad, he knew the dangers and may have saved other lives.
If the fire doesn't have enough oxygen to burn, how are the passengers supposed to breathe ?
From what I understand, it was the opening of the doors and rush of oxygen that caused a flash fire. It might've happened regardless if they landed the plane a few minutes earlier.
I was an eyewitness to this disaster. I was 9 years old. But it's what got me interested in fire science.
Yikes, I can't even begin to imagine what that must have been like.
On the plane? Or on the ground?
@@grmpEqweer on the ground. We was way way distance back from it though we could see the plane on fire, thought everybody got off cuz everybody was lined up on the tarmac. But later on found out that 23 people didn't get out.
I was in the Endeavour spaceship. I survived. That got me into crash science.
@@Dinco422 The Endeavour crashed? That's news to me.
Given it started in the lavatory, I honestly would have assumed a hastily-snuck and discarded cigarette would be a likely cause of it. But given that the source isn't understood, who honestly knows?
Your channel is awesome, keep up the great work.
Back in 1983 smoking wasn't prohibited on flights. There were smoking and non-smoking seating sections. (Of course, in a metal tube there wasn't any benefit from sitting in non-smoking.) Air Canada banned smoking on their flights in 1990 (according to wikipedia.) My point, I suppose, is that there wouldn't be much need to "sneak" a cigarette when you could just have one normally.
@@TheBierp They may not have been trying to "sneak". Perhaps they figured since smoking was allowed on the plane that they would just have one while they pooped... I can only imagine the nervousness of sitting there as the smoke slowly fills the plane knowing you likely caused it or the feeling they carried with them since if that was the case.
@Schlomo Baconberg Careless smoking has never been officially ruled out as a possibility so... Not technically from the ashes but, if a fire had started for any reason that fire could have caused a short in the electrical wires that would lead to the circuit breaker being tripped.
It could be caused by wire short circuit, since the pilot noticed an electrical failure shortly before the smoke was reported, and that was recorded by the blackbox.
They said it didn't come from the trashcan and smoke was coming from behind the vanity unit, which was fixed to the wall. No cigarette.
Imagine surviving that ordeal in the air, only to die on the ground. Terrible.
If a breaker trips, investigate why before resetting. It popped for a reason. Its not even as if it was on a vital system.
@Schlomo Baconberg there's more than one toilet on a plane, usually 4 on most flight I've been on, I've been on flights with a toilet out of order before.
@@souralba2727 really? More than one on a regional jet...yeah...
@@ywe3 ? I don't get your post. I'm basing mine as an electronic engineer. If a breaker trips you try find out why, especially if it keeps tripping. I'd presume these things are more important in the sky to me down on the ground. It was only one breaker that was tripping, not many so go investigate the source? No? Not an expert in avionics but mos circuits are separated on their own fused circuit as to isolate it if there is a problem. Thus a tripped circuit usually points to some potential problem. Yes circuits do trip due to spikes, surges and bad breakers but investigation is warranted. Especially when it is in a situation that could threaten life. I've seen equipment quarantined for less
@@ywe3 ah get it now, talking about toilets. End of the day would you rather piss your pants or die? That's the basics here. You'll sure be shitting yourself on the way down. On my flights from Glasgow to Luton I do regularly there is 4 on a 45 min flight. Flights to Lewis, same time on a twin prop plane (Atr 42) but is not a very common route with 40 or so passengers as most take the ferry if they can has one loo.
Very interesting regarding Halon. When I first started in the fire protection industry twenty years ago, one of my mandated tasks was to confiscate any remaining halon portable extinguishers found in buildings during routine inspections, for safe disposal. It's CFC depletant being the cited reason. I believe aircraft are the only remaining permitted use (from a UK perspective anyway)
It definitely feels more like an electrical fire. The slow increase in smoke with no visible fire followed by the tripping of multiple breakers makes it seem like a failure of an electrical component or wiring as it began to heat up, smolder, and eventually burn. An improperly disposed of cigarette could’ve also fallen in between a gap somewhere possibly near the waste bin and fallen into an area where it could’ve stated a small smoldering fire eventually damaging electrical systems that could’ve possibly aided in spreading the fire. I’m pretty sure they would’ve checked it any and all maintenance records to see if any work had recently been performed in or around that lav that potentially could’ve been a factor. An unfortunate mystery that’ll probably never be solved.
Ya, I feel like if it was a cigarette fire there would have been a lot of visible smoke prior to the circuit breakers tripping.
Agreed- and the policy (at that time) of just mashing the circuit breakers back in over and over again from the cockpit seems just ludicrously dumb. If a breaker blows in my house- which is not full of hundreds of people 30k feet in the air- I check the outlets/connections before just trying to shove power back to the circuit. You have cabin crew- use them. They are trained, they are familiar with the cabin, they are your eyes and ears outside of the cockpit- leave the F/O in his seat where he belongs.
Whilst being entirely unrelated, the use of halon extinguishers reminds me of an old war story in IT, where a cigarette cost as much as a new merc. So, someone in the datacenter had gone outside for a cigarette break. 5 minutes later, he came back, and something you should know about datacenters, is that they are highly secure and also airtight environments. This particular centre was state of the art. Having no less than 3 mantraps between you and any server-the front door, manned 24/7 by armed guards, the lift, and the airlock upon exiting the lift. Security was especially important here because one of our customers was the government, some of those servers potentially holding classified information.
Another thing to know is that you can’t even take a box into the secure area because of the risk of fire. You are given a small room in which to do your unboxing, and you take the sever in from there.
In any case, when he returned to what he was doing, for some reason, the fire system went off. If this ever happens, you’ve got about 20 seconds to make yourself scarce, as this is how long it takes for halon to clear the entire floor of any oxygen contained within. Needless to say, he did.
An investigation ensued, and it was found that, amazingly, these halon systems are so sensitive that the dude’a breath was enough to trigger the system. Because it’s an entirely air tight space,&5 takes very little of a given sample to be detectable to the fire system. Since you’re rarely inside a data centre, its idea is that you want a more sensitive system.
When all was said and done, cleanup and recharging the system cost about $70,000. It was a mighty expensive cigarette.
You know there has been a push for a long while to include smoke hoods for every seat on flights (just as they do life vests) because of how deadly just the smoke can be, but airlines wont do it because of the cost.
but you don't understand how important it is for the CEOs to get bonuses! think of the CEOs!
There's actually a lot more to this than just cost - that's just the easy blame point.
Given that people fail at putting on and correctly following instructions on what to do with a simple life vest that doesn't obstruct them while fleeing, what do you think would happen if you gave people hoods, told them to put them on their head which will obstruct their vision and make them feel even more trapped while trying to hustle them off a plane in under 90 seconds? And that's not even getting into hoods with small oxygen supplies. I'm sure the fire would love a bunch of people reduced to morons in a panic feeding it extra oxygen - it's not so great for the humans in the mix.
At the end of the day you want the fastest, easiest system to get a lot of people out of a tiny space. Giving them anything they don't understand, recognize, trust or may believe will hinder them impedes that goal.
FA's do have them available to them so that they can stay longer without dying to smoke to ensure all passengers are off, but if trained and drilled professionals often forget to use them, what do you think will happen to a bunch of random humans placed in a scary situation? And a plane on fire is definitely a terrifying situation. It's better to ease evacuation (clear exits, enough room to prevent bottlenecks and crush areas, and easy to follow instructions of exits) then add extra steps for the passengers.
In this case the cost might actually be a valid reason, don't think of CEO bonuses, think of wasted fuel and CO2, calculate the extra oil that gets burned to move them around, then calculate the number of lives saved, then calculate the number of lives killed by global warming...
Sadly, despite being one of the most self-proclaimed safest industries. Money tends to be a big factor.
People can barely figure out how to put on an oxygen mask properly let alone a smoke hood! Check out the 'geniuses' onboard a Southwest flight when the cabin depressurized.
Few things scare me as much as potentially having an onboard fire. In many ways, I think it is one of the worse possible disasters that can befall a plane since the crew and passengers often have enough time to be aware of their probable demise.
With mechanical failures, passengers don't quite know the extent of the problem, since they don't have access to the suite of indicators at the pilots' disposal, so they can hope the experience of their flight crew will provide a favorable outcome. In contrast, fire doesn't care about the abilities of the crew. The only variable is the flight time to a suitable airport.
And that's not even taking into account that the fumes emanating from the fire are extremely noxious, making it so the people onboard are constantly reminded of the issues at hand.
Scary stuff, this is.
Kinda upsetting that the captain flew the plane by himself and landed it successfully even through all of that, but then everybody left him and nobody pulled him out of the cockpit 😡
He pulled himself out of the cockpit. He was the last survivor out of the plane
I think it would be really cool if you displayed the patrons on an airport departures board template.
That is an incredible idea!
@@DisasterBreakdown Glad you like it!
@@DisasterBreakdown omg this is brilliant
Halon gas extinguishers are also used in datacenters. An alarm is sounded to give personnel time to get out before the Halon is released so you don't die.
RIP Stan Rogers. A great singer!
So true. Every time I hear or read about this incident, I think of Stan Rogers first of all... such a loss to folk music! :-(
About the captain choosing not land at Louisville, he stated (and was proven correct) that he was too high to make that airport, this is true for a normal, fully operational plane and doesn't even take into account the state of this plane. The co-pilot and airline pilots association both wrote pleas defending the captains decision as the correct one but the NTSB has refused to change their report despite this.
You make some extremely quality videos… great work! On top if that, it honors the lives lost by making people aware of the mistakes and accidents people have made, and what we have learned to avoid it from happening again, keep it up!!👍
3:10 & 4:33 was the lavatory really that big? I’ve flown a lot for decades and have never seen an airplane lav that was bigger than a phone booth!
In most planes they are smaller than a school desk
Have changed a baby's diaper in an airplane toilet; from what I know that space would hold at least 4 whole cubicles.
3:11 is that a first class lavatory? You can MOVE in it!
Thank you for your weekly vids! I'm always excited to see the next video
Thanks so much for watching
The breakers for that lav motor popping should have been a message, and as soon as smoke was smelled coming from there, should have been a warning to turn them back off. I didn't see any indication that that happened and seems like an obvious move right off the bat. Of course descending should also have been an immediate move.
You don't have to be a master electrician to know breakers trip for a reason but if I heard the narration correctly, back then they had the option to repeatedly try to reset them. That in itself is not good policy. And yes there have been several instances where the plane should have been put down sooner. In five minutes what starts as a small house fire can consume the whole house.
@@angelachouinard4581 Yeah, it's not a good sign, especially for three of them to pop like that and refuse to stay down. It should have been an early warning something was up (and why it would have been important for the captain to know the smoke was coming from the walls with no fire in sight). It's been mentioned in other sources that due to use after meals it was common for the breaker to pop like that and need to be reset and not just on this plane. It's kind of a hard call, because if it's happening on a lot of flights, then we would have had a lot of planes landing for a needless 'pan, pan, pan' but maybe the system would have been reworked sooner.
Not covered here was that this plane had experienced an explosive decompression and needed a bunch of wiring redone in the area where the fire started. Not enough of the wiring was ever recovered (it was burned to ash) to determine if this was a factor but arcing was heard on the CVR when those popped that wasn't audible to humans. It's kind of creepy that that the fire was just quietly going along at that point and if the door had just stayed closed for the rest of the flight they probably would have landed alright. Due to opening it (repeatedly) it was fed oxygen and managed to become devastating.
"Each phase has its own circuit breaker"
At least in buildings, when a multi-phase load has multiple circuit breakers powering the same equipment, the handles are tied together so that all three would trip simultaneously if a short-circuit occurs on one phase.
Ive been aboard Tupolev aircraft when it caught on fire. The kitchen was on the back of the aircraft and it caught on fire. As a young person it was not as scary because i didnt realize how serious it was.
Sorry if this comes off as babble, but I’ll try to articulate my thoughts. I was curious as to whether people on board followed the usual ‘stop, drop, crawl’ mantra that was taught back when when dealing with smoke. Judging by the passenger who first noticed the smoke, saying it smelled funny, makes me wonder whether a toxic gas was being produced (depending on what was burning), and whether those who may have crawled or lay down due to being overcome by the smoke, may have been incapacitated by the toxic gas on the ground level. This, of course, totally depends on the type of gas and whether it was dense enough to gather on the floor or not. This would also help explain why the explosion was so destructive, if it were a flammable gas. Just some thoughts. Really don’t know what I’m talking about lol
I get it. Nowadays I know there are strict regulations as to what kinds of materials can be used in an aircraft, so that they are non-flammable, flame-retardant, or at the very least, if they catch fire they don't release toxic gases, but I don't know if those regulations already existed back then and how strict they were.
I know that materials like certain plastics (like those which could be used in passenger cabin trimmings), fabrics, and foams (like those often used in upholstery) can spread fire quite easily and can release large amounts of toxic gases in the process, like carbon monoxide and even hydrogen cyanide. Nowadays you can't use such materials in an aircraft, but was it already the case back then?
I cannot imagine being on a plane that catches fire in flight. This reminds me somewhat of ValuJet flight 592. Thank you for another incredible video! I hope you’re enjoying your holiday.
Your videos are compulsive viewing. The way you explain situations, your knowledge and lack of sensationalising such tragic stories makes this my favourite channel on RUclips. Keep up the great work! 👏👏👏
Great video mate!!! It would be cool to see South African 295 that had a fire in the cargo hold (edit) oh I just realised that you included South African 295 at the end
There will be a video on that flight at some point
The fact that smoking was EVER allowed on airplanes continues to simultaneously amuse and horrify me.
really can you believe they even allowed smoking wow
I smoke and I cannot imagine surviving several hours on a metal tube full of smoke, it’s crazy!
@Andrew Phillips lol wat
@Andrew Phillips I prefer very month or very year pseudoscience, but thanks anyway.
@Andrew Phillips this isn't even anti smoking. This is literally just the safety of the passengers and crew, as well as the structure of the plane. Fire is deadly.
Thank you for covering this incident.
Such a sad day, the loss of Stan Rogers hit me hard. His song “Northwest Passage” is the unofficial Canadian national anthem to many. Had he lived, I would like to have thanked him for it.
And the guy who wrote "Barratts Privateers" as well.
I woke up and I realized this was uploaded! Perfect video to have breakfast to :D
The TV manufacturing magnate Curtis Mathes also died on this flight.
I've just discovered your channel and I'm hooked! You present what happened concisely, and explain things in a way that even noobs like me can understand. No over dramatisation, just well researched info. I look forward to seeing more of your videos!
3:30am can't sleep. Disaster Breakdown new upload..... hell yeah!
I listen to some of the songs Stan Rogers wrote, his work is big in the folk scene to this day
Your vids is very professional n well made, thank you for being so respectful of disasters
I like the hard work you guys put into your production keep it up y'all
not sure how this channel ended up in my recommended but i am a fan now also confirms why i never want to get on a plane
I love how you dropped a "washroom" in there. Good job!
great videos! these are interesting to listen to while I do my work :] cant wait for the next one
Halon is an extremely potent ozone layer depleting and greenhouse effect supporting gas. Therefore it is not used in every day fire extinguishing.
Great job with the channel, Sir.
Curtis Mathes of the tv name also perished. The DC-9 sat in Cincinnati for years covered in tarps.
The quality of your videos is just unreal!
I didn't realize until today that this is the flight that Stan Roger, the great Canadian musician, died on this flight.
Curtis Mathes also died in this airplane disaster. He was the head of the Curtis Mathes electronics corporation.
Hope you had a relaxing week off!
If you want to take a look at a second Air Canada incident, I reccomend looking at Air Canada Flight 143. Plane (a brand new Boeing 767) loses both engines and runs out of fuel at 41,000 feet - a scenario not trained for at all. Pilots manage to land the thing with no deaths or major injuries by performing a forward slip and gliding onto a drag race strip, when this could have easily resulted in the deaths of everyone on board.
Post-event trivia … the undamaged starboard wing of this aircraft was later detached and used as a replacement in the repair of another DC-9.
it's so haunting and sad to look at the images of the still intact burnt out the fuselage and remember that despite the successful landing around 23 passengers didn't walk away from this aircraft.
"I expect the fire to be put out". Ok, so we're good.
It is so insane they wanted you to fight the fire first before landing. Like uh were not on a bombing run over Germany here lol.
SAA295 & Air Canada Flight 797 both had one thing in common: the cause of the fire that destroyed both planes was labelled as undetermined due to lack of enough evidence...
You can add Saudia 163 in there. Man, that one creeps me out. They had three barely qualified people flying the plane (seriously), and due to the design, the fire had already breached the cabin floor at the time of landing from the cargo hold. Yet they landed safely but it appears the pilots never put on their oxygen. They taxied along for a couple of minutes, ATC had to yell at them repeatedly to turn off their engines which they finally did and then nothing. No evacuation. And the fire crew stationed there to fight fires on planes had no idea how to do so. It took almost thirty minutes for them to open one of the doors despite seeing flames in the back. Shortly after, flashover occurred. How the fire started and spread so quickly or became so hot at the start of the flight is still unkown.
Add another one to your list, Varig flight 820.
I've been searching RUclips thin for this channel and ended up at Mini Plane Crash Investigation (good guy though), and finally found this.
Believe it or not landing a passenger plane is not like parking a car, or setting down a helicopter. It takes time to descend and slow down without stalling. I know all of you are capable of making such decisions and adjustments instantaneously, but not everyone is as awesome as you guys.
There's someone out there who knows that the dump they took on the plane was so massive, so rank, that it brought a plane down.
Awwwwww....23 ppl died I shouldn't be laughing but damn you that was good...
I guess someone had explosive diarrhea
@@LunaticTheCat too much hot sauce
Thanks Chloe
God bless the crew🙏❤️
Air Traffic Control sounds an awful lot like Tech Support
I almost spill my morning coffee while sipping when I saw Flaminghotcheetosmakemybutthurt
the fact that it was conventional procedure to not try to land ASAP when there's a fire on board is just astounding to us today.
You cant single phase a 3 phase motor it will overheat and catch fire. Just because it has a fuse on each leg doesn’t mean you have 3 back ups. 3 phase motors need all 3 phases to work normally. Most likely it was on across the line or wye-delta starter. The high amperage pulled to start the motor can get extremely hot on a matter of seconds.
@Albino trapper. if I heard him correctly, the pilot's had the option to keep trying to reset the breakers multiple times. My father ( who was an aeronautical engineer) taught me breakers trip for a reason and if it won't reset after a couple of tries, don't push it. Leave it tripped and find the problem. A little hard to do when you are flying an airliner, though. What you say about the motor makes real sense to me.
@@angelachouinard4581 Try a breaker once. If it doesn’t hold find the problem.
Keep resetting it and the problem will become visible real quick in the form of smoke and fire.
One shot, hunt the problem.
@@richardcranium3417 Agree actually. Bought an old house and i tried to reset a breaker which tripped again. Pulled everything off the circuit and called an electrician. Fire can spread too darn fast.
Right? It's not as if a lavatory motor is an essential equipent without which you can't safely reach your destination; leave the breakers alone and hang an “out of order” sign or whatever. Specially if the plane has more than one lavatory.
The flight attendants were: Sergio Benetti, Laura Kayama, Judith Davidson. All survived.
RIP
To the 23 passengers of Air Canada Flight 797
I was training at FlightSafety in Wichita KS that day. Remember it well.
Halon aka BCF is still used in aviation and I believe in certain circumstances the maritime industry also.
I’m not aware that it was ever in a green cylinder. When available for general use it used to be in a yellow cylinder, in aviation it is typically red.
Because aviation oxygen cylinders are green, it would not be permitted to have an extinguisher the same colour.
With the potential for confusion in an emergency due to stress and the psychological response of reduced awareness to finer details, the wrong cylinder could be retrieved for the wrong emergency, not that it would then be used, but it would be a time wasting exercise in a time-critical scenario.
It might sound implausible however research has proven otherwise.
Although Halon/BCF is one of the best extinguishing agents (hence its permitted use in aviation), precautions must be taken.
As mentioned towards the end of this video, it chemically displaces all available oxygen where ever the chemical agent is directed. Consequently a PBE** must be worn.
The reason for its prohibition everywhere else is not due to its oxygen stripping action, but the agent has a detrimental effect on the atmospheric ozone layer.
Occasional use in aviation (and maritime if I’m correct) is so limited it’s unlikely to be an issue.
However widespread use around the world for firefighting collectively does have a significant and negative effect.
Great presentation, terrible accident with an horrific outcome.
As soon as the doors were opened allowing oxygen rich are into the cabin it accelerated the combustion and temperature.
Regarding the plume, which is full of combustible particulates hence its dark colour, once the heat from the fire heats the plume to just over 600°c the carbon monoxide ignites.
All the furnishings and other items due to the intense heat release their own gases (called pyrolysis) these gases also ignite followed by everything igniting.
The introduction of additional oxygen accelerates this phenomenon hence the explosive reaction.
A terrifying unsurvivable environment. Because of the extremely toxic gases 'pyrolysing' along with other toxic gases including cyanide and carbon monoxide the victim is typically (hopefully) unconscious before that horror unfolds.
There are few other truly overwhelmingly terrifying scenarios I could imagine.
** PBE or Personal/Protective Breathing Equipment. It comprises a fire retardant smoke hood and oxygen source.
The oxygen is typically the chemically generated type although there is an excellent Dräger PBE that is the fastest to don that has a ring shaped cylinder providing a gaseous supply.
Some PBEs have a oronasal mask, others just create an oxygen rich breathing environment inside the hood.
To prevent the oxygen and fire coming into contact, they all have a tight rubber neck seal.
Their standard duration is a minimum of 15 minutes or more depending how deep and rapidly the wearer is breathing.
Halon gas is also used in larger ships engine rooms if fire erupts and cannot be extinguished by conventional fire-fighting equipment.
Rest in peace, Dear Old Stan!!!
Stan would have wrote a hell of a song if he survived this.
R.I.P Stan Rogers
I cannot believe that from the instant a passenger detects a foul smell, the pilots were not notified and NOTHING WAS DONE TO LAND THE PLANE, anywhere????!!?!!!!! I would not want to be on board that kind of flight. Given that on average it takes about 90 seconds for a tiny fire to become a major conflagration. Instead 17 minutes later, with a clear fire, the plane is still in the air with pilots discussing options. WTF!?!? And it never ceases to amaze me that during a call to the airport, the pilots never seem to be able to rattle off number of people on board, type of plane -- and indications of fuel -- it would take mere seconds. But they wasted 20 mins in the air. How freaking tragic -- RIP to all souls on board, and their families.
Go check the fire to make sure it is really over so that you decide to "cancel an already started divert" rather than inspect to see if it is now too late
Fire extinguishment happens by removing 1 or more sides of the fire triangle (or tetrahedron): removed the fuel, remove the heat, remove the oxygen, or (for the tetrahedron) stop the chemical reaction. Halon and C02 extinguishers work by pushing oxygen aside temporarily. As soon as the extinguisher is empty or turned off, the oxygen in the ambient atmosphere returns, ready to rebuild the triangle (or tetrahedron). Thus, such extinguishers ONLY succeed in the absence of a continuing heat source at the site of the fire. The fuel hasn't been removed, the oxygen only temporarily removed. Thus, if the heat source that started the fire is electrical in nature and hasn't been shut off, that heat source is still there along with the fuel and the returning oxygen, so of course the fire rekindles. A better solution (while at altitude) would have been to depressurize the plane to starve the fire of O2 permanently or at least long enough for all the fuel with reach of of the presumed prolonged electrical heat source to be consumed and thus no major rekindle.
HOWEVER, fires can smolder along at a very low O2 concentration, much lower than people need to remain conscious. The sudden flashover in the cabin once on the ground and the doors opened is totally characteristic of a ventilation-limited (as in O2-limited) structure fire suddenly getting more O2. And depressurized or not, at some point, more O2 was going to get in the plane as it descended. Thus, again we are left with a persistent heat source keeping combustion going, even if only smoldering, the whole time. And so, again, I am drawn to an electrical source of heat.
The 5 first minutes of a fire are critical and dangerous. 5 minutes of flames this is very dangerous.
Uploaded just as I'm about to have dinner. This is perfect :D
Damn I just woke up boutta eat breakfast, gotta love time zones
@@expiredmilk....8917 Either way we all enjoyed it together with our meals - breakfast, lunch, or dinner :p
Great video man, and that "flaming cheetos makes my butt hurt" name had me laughing. Actually two cheeto names lol
RIP Stan Rogers,he is on his way home from the northwest passage down to fogartys cove
Speaking of fire onboard, have you made a video about the Nigerian Airways Flight 2120 incident?
Were the lavatories really that BIG back in the 80s? By today's standards it's five times bigger.
I noticed as well. Maybe the mad dog had a huge lav lol
It's probably just a generic picture of "a lavatory"
While this fire led to great improvements, was it such a leap to have smoke detectors in the cargo hold? Had a little more aggressive and defensive thinking taken place then smoke detectors would have been placed in the cargo compartment. Perhaps, ValuJet would still be in business and the Victims of ValuJet 592 would still be alive today.
The problem on ValuJet 592 was that there wasn't anything they could do about the fire. The hold was designed to be airtight, so any fire would consume all the oxygen and self-extinguish, but that plan didn't account for an additional supply of oxygen.
I had no idea these flights made way to the policies that I used as a flight attendant in the early 2000s.✈️🙏🏾
up until 14:30 i thought this was a mistitled disaster averted. how awful. rip the passengers who didn't make it
This made me mad. I have watched so many incidents with fire and the captain wait so damn long to let the ATC know and request a Mayday landing. And it was always too late. With that so much smoke, of course there is a fire. What were they waiting for.
"Flaming Hot Doritos Make My Butt Burn"
Well that person isn't wrong, they are a nice spicy chip. They burn going in, but can also burn coming out.
That said they are still my favourite flavor of Doritos.
Did they not state in the report to always keep the door closed to the cockpit?
I've been on flight when ppl can't wait and gone in the toilet for a cigarette, now as stated they have smoke alarms now to warn of such cases. Also if not a cigarette maybe someone burnt a letter or something and discarded it in the bin instead of the toilet or something stupid like that.
What is name of music at 12:20?
Could you work on getting closed captions? I know this was just uploaded but it'd be very helpful :)