Skip to comments.Cylinder blast would be a first [QANTAS]
Posted on 07/27/2008 7:03:09 PM PDT by steve86
A Qantas Boeing 747 was forced to make an emergency landing at Manila Airport on Friday after a midair incident.
CASA spokesman Peter Gibson said the Australian Transport Safety Bureau would be focusing on whether an onboard oxygen tank had exploded, ripping a hole in the plane's fuselage.
He confirmed an oxygen cylinder was missing from the plane and this would be a key focus of the Australian Transport Safety Bureau's(ATSB) investigation into what happened.
(Excerpt) Read more at theaustralian.news.com.au ...
Posting for the new (to me) info about the possible exploding O2 tank.
Anyone feel like flying on 747-400 with this sort of Oxygen system right now?
I might have been on this very plane in the past.
Had you heard about the missing oxygen bottle?
Didn’t a regional jet have a similar problem over Florida? I recall an oxygen cylinder exploded. It was several years ago, but I believe that cylinder was being transported rather than plumbed into the on-board system.
I have EVERY confidence they’ll blame it on the “O2 cylinder” thing, REGARDLESS of the cause.
On multiple occaisions late in the day British anchors were speculating that the blasts were owing to "electrical malfunctions".
Why not oxygen tanks?
The question is did the oxygen bottle explode or and rip a hole or was it ripped out through the hole. Unless they find the bottle, they will probably never know.
Cylinders are supposed to be pressure tested every few years.
Everyone enroute over the South Pacific should be looking out the cabin window for a floating silver cylinder (assuming it didn’t actually explode, of course). If you think you see one ask the pilot to dive down for a closer look.
Those were oxygen generators that were being shipped in the hold of a Value Jet. They overheated and set the plane on fire.
The pilot was heard to say “Sydney, we have a problem.”
These bottles can become a rocket if the valve is knocked
Not oxygen cylinders, but chemical oxygen generators on the Valujet (Airtran) plane. Totally different. They created a fire, not an explosion, that brought the plane down.
Yes, you have to limit it to jets.
Well thank goodness they don’t allow regular sized shaving foams ..
I think that was an oxygen generator cartridge, which is not the same thing. One or more caught fire, possibly because the cap over the "firing" pin was not installed, as it should have been for transport. When those things "go off" they chemically generate oxygen, but also get hot. The flight was ValueJet 592.
I’ve never been on a 747.
Also they are designed with relief/burst valves that fail at a lower pressure than the tank itself. Tanks are usually secured, so there is little chance that a valve could have been sheared off (which would turn an unsecured bottle into a jet powered missle.)
And most pressurized bottles these days (especially ones used in aviation) are filament wound Kevlar or Spectra (same materials used in bulletproof vests) not steal or aluminum.
A non-metallic tank explosive failure would split the tank, not shoot metal fragments out to cut through the aircraft’s skin, which would have been required to create such a large hole.
A tank rupture might over-pressurize the baggage compartment, causing some minor damage to the structure, but I doubt it would result in that kind of localized hole. I also suspect that there are relief/burst valves in various places of the baggage compartment, that would fail before the skin would. If all of these valves are intact and there isn’t evidence of a sheared tank valve launching the tank through the skin, then logic dictates that this was an explosive device.
In the absence of a fuel, Oxygen isn’t going to explode per se as it is an oxidizer and mixing with the air of the baggage compartment would just increase the Oxygen partial pressure.
Sounds like B.S. to me. I’m surprised they are using steel cylinders still.
Safety investigators say an exploding oxygen bottle was the cause of the hole in the plane.