i hope she holds

abc xyz · Post by **abc xyz** » Sat May 12, 2007 6:19 pm

http://www.airliners.net/open.file?id=1208567&size=L

now i know there are several layers of glass but this has gotta get your heart beating a bit faster. now according to the caption this happened some time outside of Zurich. would it not have been advised to land short and get the problem fixed instead of flying like that for 3 hrs for safety sake. Comments???

C-FABH · Post by **C-FABH** » Sat May 12, 2007 6:31 pm

Check this one out... http://www.airliners.net/open.file/0821229/L/

Lost in Saigon · Post by **Lost in Saigon** » Sat May 12, 2007 6:39 pm

According to the 767 "Quick Reference Handbook"....

If the window is not deformed or leaking you just turn off the heat and contine on.

If it IS deformed or leaking then you descend to 10,000' and land as soon as possible.

WINDOW DAMAGE

Condition: Arcing, delamination, shattered, or cracked condition
of any flight deck window is observed.

If window arcing, shattered, or cracked:
WINDOW HEAT SWITCH (Affected window) . . . . . . . . .OFF
[Removes electrical power to prevent arcing.]

If the damaged window deforms, or an air leak is observed:
Plan to land at the nearest suitable airport.

If airplane altitude above 10,000 ft:
Descend to lowest safe altitude or 10,000 ft, whichever is
higher.
[Minimizes forces on the window. Outward cabin pressure counters inward
air load on the window.]

Sustained flight below 10,000 ft is not recommended due
to greater risk of bird strike.

Do not accomplish the following checklist:
WINDOW (HEAT)

oldtimer · Post by **oldtimer** » Sat May 12, 2007 6:50 pm

No big deal. Happens to the windshields in King Air's on a regular basis. Most operators carry a spare in stores.

fougapilot · Post by **fougapilot** » Sun May 13, 2007 3:26 am

Don't know much about the 767, but on the Challenger series of airplane, the "Outter ply" is about 1/4 inch think compare to the 2.5inches of the middle and inner ply. The outer ply is thin to allow the heating system to be as close as posible to the actual ice.

To the best of my knowledge, there has never been a windshield break on a Challenger. There have been however countless outter ply failure ranging from a simple heat system failure to the outter ply actually departing from the airplane. The first item on the checklist is "continue flight" no need to land short of destination since the outter ply bare no structural load. But it can look and sound scary.

Cheers,

F

GSPY · Post by **GSPY** » Sun May 13, 2007 9:55 am

Happened to me once in a KingAir 200. Sounds scary but is really no big deal.

yycflyguy · Post by **yycflyguy** » Sun May 13, 2007 10:07 am

GSPY wrote:Happened to me once in a KingAir 200. Sounds scary but is really no big deal.

It is a little different when the windshield goes at FL 390 than at FL 220 and can be a big deal depending on which layer is impaired. Potential pressurization issues should be treated with great respect.

Troubleshot · Post by **Troubleshot** » Sun May 13, 2007 10:36 am

yycflyguy wrote:
GSPY wrote:Happened to me once in a KingAir 200. Sounds scary but is really no big deal.
It is a little different when the windshield goes at FL 390 than at FL 220 and can be a big deal depending on which layer is impaired. Potential pressurization issues should be treated with great respect.

Not really.... the ratio of how high an aircraft goes compared to the thickness of the panes in each respective window is proportional. Doesn’t matter which pressurized aircraft you fly. Each window is designed to withstand maximum differential pressures in the event a pane fails, at flight level 390 the diff. pressure would be greater... but the glass is much thicker and the window weighs twice as much then the King Air's window. To lose either window at altitude would be catastrophic to each particular aircraft...not just because it's at FL 390.

yycflyguy · Post by **yycflyguy** » Sun May 13, 2007 11:31 am

In the most extreme case with an explosive decompression event at FL 430 the time of useful consciousness is between 9-15 seconds. My comments were directed at potential crew incapacitation.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_of_Us ... sciousness

While in training at Flight Safety International I was shown an old military video where pilots were tested on the effects of explosive decompression. They were placed in a testing chamber and knew the event was going to occur. They only needed to place the oxygen mask over their face after it occured and only 2 or 3 out of ten could do it before passing out. Wish I could find the link as it is a powerful video.

In an actual event at higher altitudes do you think you could recognize the surprise situation and deal with it appropriately in under 10 seconds? In a King Air at Fl 220 you have 10 minutes to deal with it.

tiggermoth · Post by **tiggermoth** » Sun May 13, 2007 3:25 pm

probably would be a good idea for them to have llanded as soon as possible, howver, when you are over the atlantic ocean there is nowhere to land. Closer to continue on than to turn around.

Troubleshot · Post by **Troubleshot** » Sun May 13, 2007 7:02 pm

yycflyguy wrote:In the most extreme case with an explosive decompression event at FL 430 the time of useful consciousness is between 9-15 seconds. My comments were directed at potential crew incapacitation.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_of_Us ... sciousness

While in training at Flight Safety International I was shown an old military video where pilots were tested on the effects of explosive decompression. They were placed in a testing chamber and knew the event was going to occur. They only needed to place the oxygen mask over their face after it occured and only 2 or 3 out of ten could do it before passing out. Wish I could find the link as it is a powerful video.

In an actual event at higher altitudes do you think you could recognize the surprise situation and deal with it appropriately in under 10 seconds? In a King Air at Fl 220 you have 10 minutes to deal with it.

Oh I thought we were talking about windows...my bad

GilletteNorth · Post by **GilletteNorth** » Mon May 14, 2007 10:51 am

The remark posted for the photo only says:

The window cracked due to malfunction of the heating system on a flight from MBJ to ZRH about 3hrs before landing over the atlantic.

So the flight was from Jamaica to Zurich, last 3 hours was with a cracked windshield. Do you know if the crew requested a lower altitude, lower airspeed or took the precaution of wearing oxygen masks and ensuring they were strapped into their seats? No... why? Because the remark doesn't say. So if the aircraft made it to the runway then they must have made the right decisions according to the situation.

Croissant Wrench · Post by **Croissant Wrench** » Mon May 14, 2007 12:57 pm

All that shatters is either the inner or outer laminated sheet of three layers. The middle layer alone is the structural componant is about as likely to "let go" as an engine falling off the wing.

There are many theories why the pane shatters but never-the-less it has been virtually rectified in a new generation of design.

xsbank · Post by **xsbank** » Mon May 14, 2007 1:08 pm

There's a very sad story about a Challenger crash/fire and the fire crew trying to get the aircrew out by chopping a hole in the windshield - needless to say two guys with axes could not do it and the crew perished. The windshield is not an escape route.

Its only an outer-ply failure that you're looking at in that photo.