Back to Squawk list
  • 34

Plane traveling at 14,000 feet forced to turn around after passengers notice 'noisier and colder' cabin

Submitted
A plane traveling from London to Orlando was missing two windowpanes when forcing it to turn around after passengers noticed the cabin was 'noisier and colder' An American Airlines passenger was the only one on his flight after it was delayed by 18 hours. A plane took off from an airport near London with two missing windowpanes, a government agency said in a recently released report. The incident happened Oct. 6 on an Airbus A321 charter flight traveling from London Stansted Airport… (www.foxbusiness.com) More...

Sort type: [Top] [Newest]


nobleord
Bryan Opalka 22
Watch the cut and paste... the sentence "An American Airlines passenger was the only one on his flight after it was delayed by 18 hours" is a different linked article that has nothing to do with the window issue story.
outward
Jimmy Robinson 8
Well son of a gun. You're right. Oops! I like to proofread what I write but somehow missed the off-topic sentence I pasted. I'll have to be more careful.
Bayouflier
Bayouflier 3
Especially since you attributed the incident to American, and there won't be a retraction.
mark7dailey
mark dailey 10
It seems the windows were stressed/deformed by the high temps of the lights on them as described in the article. Perhaps not apparent on a typical preflight walkaround - even if one was looking directly at the windows. (hard to fault the crew here)
It's fortunate they 'popped out' early in the flight while atmospheric pressure delta was low.
It would have been much 'noisier and colder' if the panes failed 20-30 minutes later. Yikes.
WALLACE24
WALLACE24 3
Yikes is right. Noisier and colder aren’t near as exciting as rapid decompression and trying to put on oxygen mask! Lol
ColinSeftel
Colin Seftel 8
This was previously posted last month with more details from the investigation by the British AAIB. See https://www.flightaware.com/squawks/view/1/1_year/new/94134/Probe_Finds_Titan_Airways_Airbus_A321LR_Took_Off_From_London_Stansted_With_Window_Missing
outward
Jimmy Robinson 6
I didn't realize that. I did a search for squawks with keywords to check to see if it had been posted but didn't find anything unfortunately.
Bursk
Randall Bursk 5
Like one of the comments mentioned, read the actual AAIB Report. Check the website for the Charter/Commercial Service. Better information and history of operator. Facts, no adds.
outward
Jimmy Robinson 11
This article is on Fox Business which has an error window that prevents it from being read if an ad blocker is used, which I do use. I use ctrl A to select all, copy, then paste everything into a word document which allows me to read the article. A quick way to get around being blocked. And yes, I do realize that ads are what produce the revenue that makes the news possible. But the flash ads and ad-on-top and ads with video and sound are so annoying and distracting and sometimes make me not want to read the article at all.
jeffinsydney
jeff slack 7
You are off point with the article but you are ON-POINT with what you have commented about ads and the need to use blockers because some pages are overwhelmed by ads and the original content is impossible to read.
outward
Jimmy Robinson 5
I figured out what happened. I saved the article in a document and in editing it and erasing links, I somehow missed one of the story links in the article after it was changed to just text.
4gloriajohns
Gloria Johns 4
Stop beating yourself up. Mistakes happen. You're forgiven.
outward
Jimmy Robinson 2
Thank you. I appreciate it.
jkeifer3
Joe Keifer 4
Do those who do walk-around check before pushback ever look up or are they focused on the control surfaces, undercarriage and control surfaces only?
jetjocknj
jetjocknj 2
At some point you have to look at ALL of the airplane. (Even though these window defects may have been next to impossible to perceive from the ground.)
asellitto
A Sellitto 3
How is this not a serious problem. What about a plane sitting on a desert runway for a few hours?
A uote from the article: "The U.K. agency found an interesting culprit for the missing windowpanes: bright lights used for a filming session involving the plane one day before the flight.

According to the agency, the windows sustained "thermal damage and distortion" as several lights caused elevated temperatures on the area where the windowpane was, since the lights were illuminated for four to five and a half hours."
nesika42
At 14,000 ft. the passenger's complaints shouldn't have been the only thing alerting the pilots! Pressurization of the cabin was obviously not possible and some kind of failure indication/warning surely was going to the cockpit by the time they got to 14,000 if not well before!! Something not right about this story as reported!
ToddBaldwin3
ToddBaldwin3 3
The middle panes were intact which led to normal cabin pressurization.
Shocker7777
Shocker7777 1
The lights appear to be LED's, there is no way from the distance shown they could cause damage. The majority of the heat would at the rear of the fixtures where the LED drivers are located.
Moviela
Ric Wernicke 1
Actually the beam from large single chip led theatrical lamps can get quite toasty, but in an aircraft interior a good dp could shoot with a total load of 100 watts. These would be multichip lamps and the beam has no heat at all.
mimana
mimana 1
"The crew member described the noise as "loud enough to damage your hearing." After the crew member informed the pilots of the situation, they made a decision to return to London Stansted Airport."
A decision was made: "We won't be able to cross the ocean with such noise. I say lets go back...
bdjam
Brian James 1
I guess the pre flight walk around wasn't successful
apatz
Albert Patzke 1
Well the pilot who did the exterior preflight will be facing some consequences. Especially if any security cameras catch the missing windows being missing before pushback.
watkinssusan
Many years ago there was an incident of a passenger being literally sucked out of the window on an aircraft..i believe it was a dc10 operated by then NW airlines..
Propwash122
Peter Fuller 1
You may be recalling this 1973 event involving a DC10:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Airlines_Flight_27
Daedaluz
Colin Randall 0
Any story that comes from the Fox stable needs to be validated very carefully

I'm told the Fox moto is 'don't let the truth get in the way of a good story'

[This comment has been downvoted. Show anyway.]

WillyRoss
Bill Ross 10
The error lies with the maintenance crew and poor preflight by the FO ad the cabin crew

[This poster has been suspended.]

rburton3648
Rodney Burton 6
It seems you're unaware this is FlightAware, Mr. Doyle. Time to go home.

[This poster has been suspended.]

outward
Jimmy Robinson 9
This is not the place for it. This is a forum for aviation and posts should be relevant to the topic at hand. Political discussion should be elsewhere, on another site, not FlightAware. Your post is out of line.
Propwash122
Peter Fuller 5
Beyond downvoting a post, any FlightAware member so inclined can click on “Report” under any post, to report said post as spam.
outward
Jimmy Robinson 3
Everyone needs to report his posts.
BillOverdue
Bill Overdue 1
Have another beer!

Login

Don't have an account? Register now (free) for customized features, flight alerts, and more!
Did you know that FlightAware flight tracking is supported by advertising?
You can help us keep FlightAware free by allowing ads from FlightAware.com. We work hard to keep our advertising relevant and unobtrusive to create a great experience. It's quick and easy to whitelist ads on FlightAware or please consider our premium accounts.
Dismiss