8 ms·

I was on a flight where we had a fire inside of the cabin because of some mobile device. What I found weird was the only piece of communication being that "we a

• cedws 2y ago
  What airline was it? I've never been to the US but seen a lot of random videos and pilots in the US sound kind of unprofessional. They don't seem to communicate clearly and use very casual language. For instance I saw a video recently where the pilot refused a plane because he "wasn't feeling it" or something.
  • verzali 2y ago
    No, that's a standard part of flying safety. If you are not in the right mental state to fly you shouldn't, and especially not if the lives of hundreds of people depend on you.
    • cedws 2y ago
      That isn't the point I was making. Read again.
  • ocdtrekkie 2y ago
    If the pilot isn't feeling the plane, I don't want to be on it either, so I'm not sure that's an "unprofessional" issue.
  • Spartan-S63 2y ago
    In that particular instance, that pilot also mentioned there were issues with engine oil pressure, IIRC, and the fuel filter was scheduled to be replaced after the long haul flight over water. Those concerning data points were what led to him not “feeling it.” That type of casual language, IMO, makes it easier for people to empathize with the conclusion based on hard facts.
    • cedws 2y ago
      Still I've never heard a pilot communicate like that. On the European airlines I've flown on the pilot would concisely and professionally explain the situation and then make a formal apology.
      • burnished 2y ago
        OK, Karen
      • jerlam 2y ago
        This probably happens on American airlines, but it won't make the news so you won't know about it unless you were on the plane.
      • DAGdug 2y ago
        The language of the corporate meeting room in America is also a lot more casual than in Europe. It has zero bearing on actual professionalism (defined, “ the competence or skill expected of a professional”) given the results of American corporations (or the strong safety record of US pilots). So, while I can literally understand your point, I can’t see why it’s material to anything.
  • Jhsto 2y ago
    It was United.
  • dghlsakjg 2y ago
    That video was noteworthy because it was such unusual phrasing.
  • 6SixTy 2y ago
    The pilot in command can refuse an aircraft because of unresolved mechanical or technical issues, and sometimes issues that for example are fine on a clear calm day can just not be in weather. Remember that the pilots themselves are responsible for the safety of the aircraft and all passengers for the duration of the flight, so it's up to their judgement to make sure that a flight is safe. But a fire on a plane is pretty much the most dangerous event you can have on a flight. Especially lithium battery fires since aircraft don't have the right extinguisher for them, and staff are generally trained to quarantine the fire just long enough so it can be taken care of on the ground.
    • elcritch 2y ago
      Seems like a “lithium fire box” or perhaps fireproof bag capable of containing lithium fires and smothering them would become standard on planes. Most personal electronics are fairly small as well.
      • 6SixTy 2y ago
        The official training video by the FAA outlines that crew should extinguish the fire with onboard equipment and keep it cool with water to prevent it from thermal runaway again. In one outline, FAA doesn't endorse putting it in a bag or touching it any further than it needs to be, and another in response to commercial "FAA approved" products for lithium battery fires, does not endorse nor discourage using such products.
      • LorenPechtel 2y ago
        You can't smother a lithium battery fire because it's not using atmospheric oxygen in the first place. The only options are containment or cooling.
• cactacea 2y ago
  Why do you feel that is weird? Keeping the passengers informed isn't really a priority in a situation like that. They told you when you needed to know.
  • Jhsto 2y ago
    I thought that even the cabin crew did not know what's burning. There's also the feeling of helplessness -- you know something is wrong but you are not told that something is wrong. The hysteria at the back of the plane could have been alleviated by telling that the situation is under control. When the plane was landing, I could see fire trucks, an ambulance, and police of some sort driving in parallel to the plane to rush in. I only found out about the reason from the news later.
    • maccard 2y ago
      You are helpless, the cabin crew know what’s going on but aren’t telling you, and the hysteria at the back of the plane won’t be alleviated by telling them there’s a fire in the cabin, you’re making an emergency landing and to prepare for an emergency response unit upon landing. There’s nothing you can do other than stay in your seat and keep out of the way.
  • IshKebab 2y ago
    What? Keeping passengers informed is zero effort, a nice thing to do, and probably a good idea. Why would you not say "we are returning due to a battery fire. The fire has been contained but we must return because X y z" or whatever.
    • mschuster91 2y ago
      > Why would you not say "we are returning due to a battery fire. The fire has been contained but we must return because X y z" or whatever. Because as soon as you mention "fire" you'll get a bunch of dumb fucks panicking themselves so hard they're going to behave completely irrationally (like attempting to rip open the emergency doors which IS possible at low enough altitudes) - or manage to induce legitimate medical problems. Heart attack for the older folks, dyspnea up to actually going unconscious from hyperventilation for the younger folks.
• y33t 2y ago
  Just curious, were they able to purge or scrub the smoke from the cabin? Seems like a battery fire in a closed space like that would be a lung hazard.
  • jerlam 2y ago
    Airliners have touted in the pandemic that planes have HEPA filtration which remove 99.95+% of particles in the air, which includes smoke particles. Battery fires will also produce other bad stuff in the air, but it's still a minor consideration compared to a fire which can bring down the plane.
    • aeternum 2y ago
      The issue is how quickly they cycle the full cabin air volume.
• KineticLensman 2y ago
  > What I found weird was the only piece of communication being that "we are returning" Aviate, Navigate, Communicate
  • Dylan16807 2y ago
    Can you elaborate on how that is relevant? It's hard for me to imagine how the urgent aviation and navigation involved in turning the plane around takes two people 15 uninterrupted minutes, let alone the portion after turning around needing 15 uninterrupted minutes.
    • adamm255 2y ago
      The order of doing things while flying… Arranging a reroute with ATC, explaining everything, adjusting the autopilot for the new route etc. Assessment time on what to do. Those in the back don’t need to know anything until those decisions are made and executed. It’s not like there’s a negotiation to be had!
      • Dylan16807 2y ago
        > The order of doing things while flying… Did my comment give you the impression I didn't understand that? But I don't think it's enough of an explanation. > Arranging a reroute with ATC, explaining everything, adjusting the autopilot for the new route etc. Assessment time on what to do. Those in the back don’t need to know anything until those decisions are made and executed. It’s not like there’s a negotiation to be had! Do you think they turned around before most of those things? Do you think there were no gaps where they could have communicated? I wonder if they actually were following "Aviate, Navigate." end of checklist.
        • curiousObject 2y ago
          > I wonder if they actually were following "Aviate, Navigate." end of checklist. “Communicate” means communication with air traffic control They did that. Communication with the passengers is good, of course, but optional, if they have time