How Googling led to an emergency landing of a Titan Airways A321

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 5 жов 2024
  • In early 2020, the crew of a Titan Airways A321 suffered engine stalls on both engines and had to perform an emergency Landing at London Gatwick. The A321's fuel had been treated with chemicals, and an engineer unfortunately made a crucial mistake when performing a maintenance task.
    Titan Airways is a British charter Airline operating a Fleet of Airbuses and Boeings.
    ☕ Would you like to support the channel? Buy me a coffee! ☕
    www.buymeacoff...
    Chapters
    Story - 0:31
    Investigation 2:50
    Link to my other videos:
    / @airspacevideos
    Find me on Twitter:
    Ai...
    or Instagram:
    @airspace_yt
    How Googling lead to an emergency landing of a Titan Airways A321
    ---- About this channel ----
    I am an airline pilot bringing you accurate and undestandable reports on past aviation disasters, plane crashes and weekly news in aviation.
    Please like, comment and subscribe if you like my content!
    -------------------------------------------------------
    Credits
    Music:
    Bensound - Better Days
    Plane videos:
    Visuals posted with kind permission by:
    mylosairplanefan - / @mylosairplanefan
    SL planespotting - / @manaviation
    eye trapper - / @eyetrapper

КОМЕНТАРІ • 220

  • @AirspaceVideos
    @AirspaceVideos  3 роки тому +211

    I made a mistake - the technician added 30kg to each tank, not 60kg. Still, the statement about that being a 37-fold overdose is correct.

    • @elweewutroone
      @elweewutroone 3 роки тому +14

      How were the calculations done incorrectly? Using Google to find out what ppm is does not cause this kind of miscalculation as far as I can tell.

    • @gastonpossel
      @gastonpossel 3 роки тому +8

      @@elweewutroone I think he misunderstood what ppm stands for and confused it with a unit of measure. You cant just convert ppm to kg with an online calculator.

    • @JxH
      @JxH 3 роки тому +6

      I noticed that. 60/0.799 cannot be "37"; since 0.799 is less than one, the answer must be more than 60. You made me pause the video! Okay. Back to watching the rest of the video... :-)

    • @Milesco
      @Milesco 3 роки тому +5

      @ Airspace _("I made a mistake - the technician added 30 kg to each tank, not 60 kg.")_
      So you're as bad as the technician!!! :-D

    • @lekoman
      @lekoman 3 роки тому +1

      @@gastonpossel I mean, you can if you know how many million are in a kg.

  • @ConstantlyDamaged
    @ConstantlyDamaged 3 роки тому +157

    Can you imagine the thought running through the head of the person who okayed the order of biocide?
    "Huh. Why does he want thirty times more biocide than a normal order? Oh well, he's the engineer!"

    • @AirspaceVideos
      @AirspaceVideos  3 роки тому +57

      I thought about that too... "heck maybe he has to do the entire fleet, what do I know!"

    • @andyowens5494
      @andyowens5494 3 роки тому +32

      If it comes in 100kg drums or 1000kg totes (which it does) then I doubt a store-man would necessarily think its an excessive amount. Engineers ask for crazy things all the time, and only seasoned veterans have much of a clue what is reasonable (and they either get promoted or retired; either way, the skill isn't always where it's needed). If it came in 1 litre bottles, maybe 60kg would have rung a few more alarm bells.

    • @DeltaFoxtrotWhiskey3
      @DeltaFoxtrotWhiskey3 3 роки тому +16

      Depends on where he ordered it from. For all the warehouse knew, the guy could’ve been supplying a hangar and was about to treat multiple planes.

    • @louiehorwood660
      @louiehorwood660 2 роки тому +1

      Also I wonder if airports use it to treat the tanks they use for storing fuel on the ground.
      If so they would probably use larger amounts and the large order would seem normal.

    • @ConstantlyDamaged
      @ConstantlyDamaged 2 роки тому

      @@louiehorwood660 Tanks on the ground don't have to deal with high-altitude, at-speed temperatures which can get scary-cold.

  • @gdwnet
    @gdwnet 3 роки тому +137

    scary that an engineer didn't know the term "ppm".

    • @mrporcupine4140
      @mrporcupine4140 3 роки тому +11

      My thoughts exactly, what kind of engineer doesn't know what ppm is? Sounds like they were hired because they had friends in there rather than due to their own merits.

    • @Nabeelco
      @Nabeelco 3 роки тому +38

      A lot of countries, the term "engineer" is just thrown around, and doesn't mean someone who's actually studied engineering.

    • @AirspaceVideos
      @AirspaceVideos  3 роки тому +45

      Exactly - also, aircraft engineers are rarely engineers, more like technicians. That is not to belittle to profession, it's just a technician does an apprenticeship while an engineer goes to universtiy.

    • @C783H
      @C783H 3 роки тому +8

      @@AirspaceVideos I would argue most technicians are more intelligient than most university educated engineers I have ever worked with! A degree does not equal Intelligience. This myth seriously needs to be squashed!

    • @markstewart7559
      @markstewart7559 3 роки тому +3

      .....and relied on Google for treatment of airliner jet fuel.

  • @ExGViperJ
    @ExGViperJ 3 роки тому +93

    I have a friend who works at a hospital, and he told me that they regularly google all sorts of things they ought to know, so take that as you will... But great video as usual!

    • @jacekatalakis8316
      @jacekatalakis8316 3 роки тому +6

      Same for IT techs too and tech support.
      Ah the good old throw it all in method. Sounds like me when doing anything involving precision, just throw it all in. What could go wrong...

    • @hmartinspliff
      @hmartinspliff 3 роки тому +14

      I've got a degree in google studies.

    • @AirspaceVideos
      @AirspaceVideos  3 роки тому +9

      haha yeah, throw it all in 😄

    • @S1baar
      @S1baar 3 роки тому +9

      unlike us, those doctors know what to look for, and know what's wrong and what's right. no one can memorize everything. there's too much.

    • @1234fishnet
      @1234fishnet 3 роки тому +10

      There are specialised dictionaries for medicine. I hope they use this.
      And btw medicine is so complex, you can never know all diseases. It's better to know your own limitations than to kill a patient.
      Same with IT
      (I am working in tech and IT in hospital so I know both worlds)

  • @sdaiwepm
    @sdaiwepm 3 роки тому +116

    So interesting. A bit concerning that someone could get through an engineering or technical training program without ever having encountered the term "ppm." And of course, the mandatory "more than one mistake"!

    • @1234fishnet
      @1234fishnet 3 роки тому +8

      And now think of doctors/nurses calculating the amount of medicine needed for your body weight....
      BEEEEP. Patient dead.
      That's why they use tables to look the dose up quickly.
      I don't get why they didn't make a table for this fuel cleaning application as well

    • @AirspaceVideos
      @AirspaceVideos  3 роки тому +21

      a table would've been a good idea. But yeah, mistakes happen in hospitals, too. My grandfather was recently given more than 10x his regular dose of sleeping meds. He's ok, gladly.

    • @vjfeefeecat586
      @vjfeefeecat586 3 роки тому +2

      @@AirspaceVideos 😮

    • @fluffy-fluffy5996
      @fluffy-fluffy5996 3 роки тому +6

      @@AirspaceVideos I was once given 20mg of oxynorm instead of the 5 I normally had. I did have the longworking version of it in 20mg but shortworking was just 5. But I always check meds, I always ask to keep them in their unidose package so I can check on the back what they give me.
      And EVERY time I got admitted to a psych ward (which generally is not often but if I do...) I always take my own meds for 24h and if possible a summary from my pharmacy of all the meds I take so they won’t miss anything.
      Last time they still managed to mess up and for the week I was there my meds were never ok. I kept missing my painmeds, I got too little, too little of another medication, and while I complained daily they never changed it despite all their promises. I hope one day they will understand what that is like. Also it’s a psych ward. Which generally gives an attitude of “it’s not to be taken too serious, he/she is a patient after all.”
      I hate that attitude.

    • @AirspaceVideos
      @AirspaceVideos  3 роки тому +6

      to err is human, it seems... scary!

  • @akahito8053
    @akahito8053 3 роки тому +38

    I think I first came across the term 'ppm' when I was in 10th grade. How can a engineering not know about it. Also how he miscalculated the amount is another matter.

    • @Milesco
      @Milesco 3 роки тому +2

      Yeah, I remember coming across the term "ppm" when I was just a kid. I have to believe that the technician was not a native english speaker.
      But there is no excuse for making such a blatant mathematical error. 100 parts per million is *_easy_* to figure out! (So easy a caveman could do it!)

  • @mikemck4796
    @mikemck4796 3 роки тому +16

    Reminds me of a friend just after high school that decided to do his own oil change in his car. When adding back oil, he “topped it off” and was surprised how far off the parts store was when they told him how many quarts he’d need. He made two trips back to the store to buy more.

  • @alexcrawford6162
    @alexcrawford6162 3 роки тому +17

    A “technician” didn’t know what PPM meant? Wow!
    Rather concerning seeing as Titan Airways has been contracted for short haul Royal Family and Government flights.

  • @Arishava
    @Arishava 3 роки тому +24

    "i google almost daily" DAILY? you absolute madman!

    • @Katniss218
      @Katniss218 3 роки тому +5

      ALMOST?

    • @gdwnet
      @gdwnet 3 роки тому +4

      @@Katniss218 Yes, almost. Thats where you type something in to google, get distracted and don't finish :D

    • @AirspaceVideos
      @AirspaceVideos  3 роки тому +15

      alright alright it should rather be hourly, I admit. :)

    • @scottscouter1065
      @scottscouter1065 3 роки тому

      Have you noticed any hair growing on the palms of your hands?

  • @Bobrogers99
    @Bobrogers99 3 роки тому +41

    Google has answers for every question, but the correct answer is not always given first. You also have to know what question to ask, and in this case, how to interpret the answer.

    • @Milesco
      @Milesco 3 роки тому +4

      That's true, but in this case, the technician got the correct answer from Google; he just misapplied it. The online calculator he found said that 100 ppm was equal to 0.01%, which is correct.
      Unfortunately the mathematically challenged technician didn't appreciate the difference between 0.01% and 0.01, and as a result, he multiplied the amount of fuel in the airplane's tanks by 0.01 instead of 0.01% (i.e., 0.0001), resulting in what would've been a 100-fold overdose.
      (Strangely, there is an unexplained additional anomaly to this story. The actual amount of Kathon that the technician installed was 30 kg, not 62, resulting in an actual overdose ratio of 38 times, not 100. The incident report doesn't explain how the technician arrived at the 30 kg figure.)

    • @chri-k
      @chri-k 2 роки тому

      @@Milesco
      ( just don’t use the cursed 0 over 0 unit ever again )

  • @gharwood1356
    @gharwood1356 3 роки тому +5

    It might have been safest if the biocide manufacturer had simply given the instruction 'For every 1,000 litres of fuel, add x litres/ml of product'.

    • @AirspaceVideos
      @AirspaceVideos  3 роки тому

      good idea, don't know if that works tho, because the specific gravity changes with temeperature. But a table might help.

  • @00muinamir
    @00muinamir 3 роки тому +43

    It's easy to blame the technician here (and yeah, it's kind of amazing he didn't know what ppm was) but instructions that involve chemicals should never be this incomplete. You should always include relevant formulas in the instructions so people can just plug their numbers in and get going.

    • @AirspaceVideos
      @AirspaceVideos  3 роки тому +12

      absolutely!

    • @mrporcupine4140
      @mrporcupine4140 3 роки тому +3

      Well, that's exactly why you hire a trained engineer, they're supposed to know those formulas and how to make calculations with them. I still can't fathom how someone could be a graduated engineer and still not know what ppm is.

    • @AirspaceVideos
      @AirspaceVideos  3 роки тому +14

      well aircraft engineers are not engineers in the sense of the word, rather technicians.

    • @1234fishnet
      @1234fishnet 3 роки тому +3

      Or just include a lookup table with the values so that nobody can make a mistake.
      Keep it simple

    • @Milesco
      @Milesco 3 роки тому +4

      @@AirspaceVideos : Yeah, they shouldn't be called engineers. True engineers who had to go to university for several years (my father was one) have every right to be upset by the indiscriminate use of the word "engineer".

  • @ml9849
    @ml9849 3 роки тому +32

    On a positive note, that plane should not have microbial contaminants again. This reminded of the firefighters using jet fuel to extinguish a plane fire during training and the first dutch F35 getting a foam salute.

  • @turkicnomad5632
    @turkicnomad5632 2 роки тому +5

    The moment I heard “kilograms”, I knew exactly what hell we were descending.

  • @garytanger965
    @garytanger965 3 роки тому +50

    I'm an old geezer, but I remember when companies had toll free numbers & a person would answer the call.. A real engineer would give you a safe amount to add & remind you to take temperature into account..

    • @Milesco
      @Milesco 3 роки тому +14

      _"I remember when companies had toll-free numbers & a person would answer the call."_
      Wow, you ARE old! 😁

    • @paulazemeckis7835
      @paulazemeckis7835 3 роки тому +3

      They still have 800 numbers. You have to click "Contact Us" and hopefully they are open 24/7....at least product support. The mechanic made an error ASSUMING the definition of PPM in the wrong context, i.e., non-aviation.

    • @kewlztertc5386
      @kewlztertc5386 3 роки тому

      It just doesn't make sense, to hire another person to tell you what you should already know.

  • @PhD63
    @PhD63 3 роки тому +6

    More staggering than the ridiculous amount of treatment added was that the “engineer” referred to the wrong engine. The AMM (aircraft maintenance manual) is a combination of the airframe and the engine. I really don’t know what manual he was looking at.

  • @lautoka63
    @lautoka63 3 роки тому +6

    This is one of the things we used to try to push hard to the engineers: each time you need to know something, go to the OEM data. Don't guess, don't use the copy you downloaded last time - go to the current data. Sigh.

  • @ssnerd583
    @ssnerd583 2 роки тому +10

    When I worked for a US based airline as an A&P the biocide treatment of the fuel tanks was taken VERY SERIOUSLY by the inspection department and they usually performed the actual treatment with the leads of the shift that the treatment was being done on....that biocide is quite poisonous and dangerous to any who come into accidental contact with it and it was stored separately and away from all the other chemicals in the supply controlled area.

  • @killman369547
    @killman369547 3 роки тому +20

    Thankfully it didn't end much worse. But this could've been prevented if the biocide checklist had the exact amount of biocide needed written down. Then there would've been no room for confusion.

    • @AirspaceVideos
      @AirspaceVideos  3 роки тому +2

      yes, true.

    • @gdwnet
      @gdwnet 3 роки тому +2

      I suspect that it is better to not do that in case something changes in how the biocide is created. After all, if you print the manuals based on version 1 of the biocide and version 3 is a different formula those manuals are wrong.

    • @AirspaceVideos
      @AirspaceVideos  3 роки тому +2

      true as well, but manuals are very regularly updated. Also, a simple line explaining the unit could help.

    • @gdwnet
      @gdwnet 3 роки тому +4

      @@AirspaceVideos I've always thought that any documentation should have a page explaining it's acronyms so that there is no doubt what each one means.

    • @AirspaceVideos
      @AirspaceVideos  3 роки тому

      That should be the case yes. Apparently, ppm got left out here, though.

  • @takers786
    @takers786 3 роки тому +14

    great video, so scary knowing that you could be flying on one of these badly maintained planes!

    • @jcoghill2
      @jcoghill2 2 роки тому

      The mechanic is rarely the cause of an accident. It's not the mechanic who provides flight safety, it's the engineering that went into the aircraft and all its parts. Then it's the testing that went into the parts during certification before they were allowed to be on an aircraft.

  • @Scyth3934
    @Scyth3934 2 роки тому +2

    I was shocked when I heard that the ENGINEER didn't know that ppm stood for "parts per million" - I'm in 8th grade and I've known that for about 4 years now!

  • @apackwestbound5946
    @apackwestbound5946 2 роки тому +3

    Another example of "more is not necessarily better". "Simple" calculations have had serious consequences; Air Canada 143 "Gimli Glider," NASA's 125-million Mars Climate Orbiter. Interesting subject another well produced video! Outstanding effort and production1well done!

  • @Finians_Mancave
    @Finians_Mancave 3 роки тому +4

    "The maintenance engineer who performed the task (Biocide treatment on fuel system ) had never done it before". So they entrust an extremely crucial job - which if done wrong can bring an aircraft crashing down out of the sky - to a first-timer? Just the height of negligence. I don't blame the newbie engineer so much as I do his supervisor and the head of their maintenance crew who apparently just handed over the task and left him to figure out the details himself. Just wow....

    • @PhD63
      @PhD63 3 роки тому +2

      When I was an engineer (retired now) there were many tasks that I carried out that I had never done before (there’s always a first time for everything right?) However as an aircraft engineer it’s a legal requirement to consult the AMM for every task and have a copy of it with you as you perform the task, even if you have done it dozens of times. I never worked the A320 series but I was staggered when he deduced that he needed 60 kgs of the stuff.

  • @dimaoliynyk242
    @dimaoliynyk242 3 роки тому +8

    Great video yet again! Super interesting and well explained.
    I recently discovered your channel and immediately subscribed. Keep up the great content.

    • @AirspaceVideos
      @AirspaceVideos  3 роки тому

      Thank you so much, and welcome to the channel :)

  • @larryfromwisconsin9970
    @larryfromwisconsin9970 3 роки тому +7

    I was a passenger on a US Air Force C141 that lost all power after taking off from Palmerola Airfield in Honduras in 1985. It was a scary glide back to the runway. They attributed it to bad fuel taken on in Panama.

  • @2drx4
    @2drx4 2 роки тому +1

    Biobor JF has a handy chart right on the bottle for figuring out how much you need. It's deadly toxic stuff, but at least they made it easy to use.

  • @grahamknowles759
    @grahamknowles759 3 роки тому +28

    I love the knee-jerk reaction from EU. "You can't use that product !" .. and now the EU has no approved product for this process. I don't often laugh at these videos, but this one really got me.

  • @philippgabler5835
    @philippgabler5835 2 роки тому +1

    Airline: "How much chemicals did you add to the tank?"
    Engineer: "Yes!"

  • @PavlosPapageorgiou
    @PavlosPapageorgiou 3 роки тому +4

    That's why it's important to learn intuitive estimation. If the instructions say "parts per million" and you're ordering kilograms of the stuff something should feel off.

  • @srinivasgattu6842
    @srinivasgattu6842 2 роки тому +1

    How much effort (man days) does it take to make a video like this. Do keep up the great work.

  • @paulyiustravelogue
    @paulyiustravelogue 2 роки тому +2

    The last time I googled about air incident investigations, it told me about Airspace… by the way, that stock footage of the port (port of Hong Kong) is actually very close to my home. That shot just missed my home at the upper left corner. Cheers.

  • @ranahussnainsaleem6794
    @ranahussnainsaleem6794 3 роки тому +3

    ❤️ excellent work as always

  • @ThePilotsLife
    @ThePilotsLife 3 роки тому +3

    Very very interesting. Liked it a lot!!

  • @CyberSystemOverload
    @CyberSystemOverload 3 роки тому +2

    Great video and interesting story. Excellent presentation as usual. I will remind myself not to skip the ads cos I want you to get all the revenue.

    • @Milesco
      @Milesco 3 роки тому

      Except that, in a massive bit of irony, the presenter himself was off by a large factor. (The maintenance technician put in 75 times the required amount of Kathon, not 37 times.)

    • @Epic_Aviation
      @Epic_Aviation 3 роки тому

      @@Milesco pretty sure 37 fold is equivalent to 74/75 times
      From what i know 2 fold = x4, 3 fold = x6, etc

    • @Milesco
      @Milesco 3 роки тому

      @@Epic_Aviation : Nope. Not sure what your source "from what you know" is, but that's incorrect. 37-fold simply meams 37 times, and 75-fold means 75 times, etc.
      From Dictionary.com:
      *-fold* : a native English suffix meaning “of so many parts,” or denoting multiplication *_by the number indicated by the stem or word to which the suffix is attached:_* twofold; manifold.
      (Emphasis added)

    • @Epic_Aviation
      @Epic_Aviation 3 роки тому +1

      @@Milesco I looked it up before a few months ago and just looked it up again, it seems most websites do agree with what you're saying but some websites say the same thing I said. I guess when I looked it up one of the minority websites were the top search results. I think I looked at 2 different websites and got the same answer.
      Thank you, you are correct.

    • @Milesco
      @Milesco 3 роки тому

      @@Epic_Aviation : Thanks, Epic. 😊

  • @manojbala6870
    @manojbala6870 3 роки тому +1

    I like your analysis. Good stuff

  • @shopart1488
    @shopart1488 3 роки тому +4

    Googling did not cause or lead to the engine failure. That was click bait. Unsupervised employees and a engineering department that should be replaced was the total cause of the failure.

  • @ElectricUAM
    @ElectricUAM 2 роки тому +1

    That is one bone-chilling story. So many goofs, not considering adding an additive to an airplane serious enough to warrant more than one person is an eyebrow-raiser.

  • @Suburp212
    @Suburp212 2 роки тому

    these are all fun videos. Great content.

  • @wafikiri_
    @wafikiri_ 3 роки тому +1

    As it was found during the investigation, the proportion of Kathon to fuel in PPM was not to be meant in kilograms but in volume. Surely a better way to express the right proportion should be in grams of product per litre of fuel.
    Another issue: nothing in the instructions about how to mix the product and fuel. Before fueling the aircraft? The mechanic poured the Kathon in the fuel tanks and then added the fuel. The fuel pumps got a really concentrated mixture from the bottom of the fuel tanks.
    The two types of engines mentioned are very different and the mechanic should have been able to distinguish them, but he was not. Poorly trained.

    • @wafikiri_
      @wafikiri_ 3 роки тому

      @Wayne Flanigan I am perfectly at ease with any units of measure, with molar concentrations and molecular weights, and with parts per million. But a technician should be provided with meaningful figures in the most convenient units. Why did I type grams of product per litre of fuel? The report mentions the quantities of product managed were weights, therefore I assume that the product (perhaps a powder) is better measured in weight units. As for fuel, when I piloted (decades ago), I had to convert litres to kilograms of fuel and vice versa several times during the flight. So I assume fuel was supplied in litres (although I was not the Captain and never had to order fuel). Thus, for technicians having to prepare the biocide/fuel mixture, the best proportion is better stated in the most appropriate units: grams per litre (or per 1,000 litres, but perhaps this could confuse an arithmetically unskilled technician even more). If fuel is supplied in kilograms and not in litres, then grams per kilogram of fuel instead would be the best unit for the technician.

  • @samuelthamburaj
    @samuelthamburaj 3 роки тому +3

    I'm curious to know what was the wrong calculation that the maintenance guy found on Google and what should have been the (right) calculation.

    • @AirspaceVideos
      @AirspaceVideos  3 роки тому +5

      Unfortunately I can only show you the right calculation, as the report does not state what exactly the technician calculated.
      From the report:
      "To achieve a concentration of 100 ppm by volume, the following calculation should be made:
      Fuel uplifted: 6,200 kg with a Specific Gravity of 0.80812 = 7,678 litres
      100 ppm = 0.0001
      7,678 x 0.0001 = 0.768 litres of Kathon
      Using a Kathon Specific Gravity of 1.04 = 0.799 kg per wing tank."

    • @samuelthamburaj
      @samuelthamburaj 3 роки тому +1

      Thanks. That helps.

    • @МихайлоСєльський
      @МихайлоСєльський 3 роки тому +2

      @@samuelthamburaj, he calculated 60 kg per tank instead of 0.8 kg per tank. 75-fold. Looks like he somehow messed up with specific density and two orders of magnitude)

  • @kwikbit
    @kwikbit 3 роки тому +1

    Amazing how many comments on here "judging" the technician. Engineers/technicians/(pilots!) make calculation mistakes very often. That is why in aviation
    (a) as much effort as possible is made to avoid human factors where possible
    (b) most things are double checked (hence 2 pilots!)
    - the only issue here is that anyone is having to make a calculation AT ALL . These calculations should all be done in advance and available on a clearly printed , large font panel. No mistaken decimal points , or units conversions , or temp/pressure adjustments... In fact, in these days of technology it could (should?) all be done in a small, centrally managed app. Ideally the technician/engineer would still do the calc and then compare with what the app says.
    But no, let's make it an obscure, unchecked , easy-to-mistake calc and then stand back and watch the comments on the subsequent UA-cam incident- video by the know-it-all-I-could-do-it-in-10th-grade-I-am-so-clever-keyboard critics.
    This issue is, as is often the case in these events, a series of systematic issues. An equally bigger issue is surely how did the "other" engineer select the WRONG ENGINE type. That is surely is equally/more worrying !!! Again, not criticising the engineer - but again surely each engine should have LARGE CLEAR labelling all over it - and/or a BAR code which is scanned to give full engine details/history ??...

  • @ralfbaechle
    @ralfbaechle 3 роки тому +6

    Hilarious, the code shown at 7:30 when the audio says "had not updated their software" is Linux kernel code.
    Which incidentally under the license terms of the GNU General Public License V2.0 covering the Linux kernel means your video is also covered by these terms.

  • @robertgotschall1246
    @robertgotschall1246 3 роки тому +2

    Wow, I'm only casually conversant in this but I know that Parts Per Million is a relatively small dose in even tons of fuel. I was shocked at the dose given, even off the top of my head.

  • @ghostrider-be9ek
    @ghostrider-be9ek 3 роки тому +1

    I just googled 100pm = its equal to 0.01%, or 0.0001. I am a former airline technician (I never use the term 'engineer' in this context).
    That means with a simple calculator, 6000kg of fuel would require 0.6kg of treatment, not 6kg or 30kg.
    The tiddlybum AME added product that was 2 fucking orders of magnitude, wrong.
    Google was not wrong, the AME is now likely fired.
    The tanks and the entire fuel system would have to be flushed out.

  • @Mrwhosethesus
    @Mrwhosethesus 3 роки тому +2

    When I read the title I though Google cause problems with the plane lol

    • @PhD63
      @PhD63 3 роки тому

      When I read the title I thought it was going to be the pilots that were doing the Googling 😂

  • @billy4072
    @billy4072 2 роки тому

    He was following that ancient maxim, some is good, more is better , and too much is just right 👍👌🙏😂

  • @JCSLstuff
    @JCSLstuff 3 роки тому

    I got a google ad before watching this...

  • @Zarcondeegrissom
    @Zarcondeegrissom 3 роки тому +6

    well, it's not the first time that an overdose leads to banning of any use of something when regular proper usage was fine or required for some things. like lead tinnings to prevent the growth of tin whiskers in critical electronics, yet lead-based paints flaking off old houses got it banned completely in some places. the proper response would be for parents to not let their kids chew on window sills, as even lead-free paint can't possibly be that good for children. I don't know of anyone that would choose to chew on electronic circuit boards, and alloyed lead doesn't 'seep' out of solder unlike paint mixes, yet it is what it is I guess, lol.
    that's why I jokingly refer to it as RoHS complacent tin whiskers, not NEPP compliance, lol.

    • @AirspaceVideos
      @AirspaceVideos  3 роки тому +1

      Yummy circuit boards!

    • @toomanymarys7355
      @toomanymarys7355 3 роки тому +1

      I'm mentioning the specific case because I believe it was a landmark case presented in a documentary. There was a lot of a sob story spin on the immigration angle, and I think that also provided a background as to why the mom didn't care that her kid was just eating paint--no lead paint awareness where she is from. Which was, in turn, why it was so incredibly serious in that child.

  • @JGKarting
    @JGKarting 3 роки тому +2

    I saw the aircraft in question departing from Manchester a few days ago

  • @jcoghill2
    @jcoghill2 2 роки тому

    Why is BioBore not permitted on aircraft of European registry? There's critters in every fuel tank on every plane because there's water in the fuel it needs to live and there is a lot of water in jet fuel. Usually more water means more critters and when you do the BioBore tests you can see it all. The critters look like tiny black specks that clump together and float in the fuel like a lava-lamp. In the US we generally don't use cathone. Once they found the condition of the fuel in the tanks they had to dump it all. They might also have been required to flush the tanks with fuel and dump that followed by an engine run to full power before returning to service.

    • @ywe3
      @ywe3 Рік тому

      why...environmental concerns...
      i.e. we're gonna use an inferior product that can cause major issues because politics...
      same reason why they recalled millions of VW diesels [which got over 60mpg] but we're "cheating" the testing...
      here's my test: if a product is good [or in the case of the VWs extremely efficient] damn the environmental concerns as they are just concerns not actual problems...human lives are more important than 1 microgram extra pollution...

  • @MrEsMysteriesMagicks
    @MrEsMysteriesMagicks 2 роки тому +1

    Yes, Google is used for a lot of professional research, but what kind of "engineer" doesn't know what "ppm" means? That's almost literally on page 2 of the textbook for Engineering 101 for Freshmen. Hardly the same thing as looking up a possible solution for a problem that one doesn't see often.

  • @ShahirUsmani
    @ShahirUsmani 2 роки тому

    Mixing something in a jet fuel does not require an audit/approval from a superior is just beyond me.

  • @VictoryAviation
    @VictoryAviation 3 роки тому +2

    Do pilots not take fuel samples from jets the same way you do with piston aircraft before every flight?

    • @AirspaceVideos
      @AirspaceVideos  3 роки тому +1

      no - how would one even reach the wings? This is usually done by the refueling operator during refueling (samples are taken from the fuel that is being delivered)

    • @VictoryAviation
      @VictoryAviation 3 роки тому

      @@AirspaceVideos How does a pilot get above the wings of even a little C150 to physically check fuel levels?… a ladder 🤷🏼‍♂️

  • @MrEsMysteriesMagicks
    @MrEsMysteriesMagicks 3 роки тому +1

    Okay, I give up. How does any individual with the word "engineer" in his job title not know what PPM means? Isn't that like the third thing they teach you on the first day of engineer school? And what on earth did Google come up with for a definition of PPM that led to such an inaccurate calculation? Also, I can tell you why the second maintenance engineer got the engines wrong. He was a screw up. Pretty much a straightforward explanation for that.

    • @PhD63
      @PhD63 3 роки тому +1

      I had to do a 5 year apprenticeship just to become a basic aircraft mechanic. This was followed by a time frame of physically working on aircraft before I could apply for my basic airframe and engine licences. This was then followed by type training on each different type of aircraft. But these days???

    • @MrEsMysteriesMagicks
      @MrEsMysteriesMagicks 3 роки тому +2

      @@PhD63 Don't tell me, let me guess. I'm assuming that somewhere along the way with all of that mandated training that someone at some time told you what "PPM" stands for. It absolutely boggles my imagination to think that someone would be hired to do such a potentially life-threatening job with no concept of the basic terminology. Hell, I can't engineer a children's swing set, but even I know what PPM means. Thank you for your post.

    • @ImperrfectStranger
      @ImperrfectStranger 3 роки тому

      Probably an "engineer" whose native language wasn't English and wasn't taught engineering in English. I was just looking at the Boeing Maintenance manual instructions for biocide and apparently one type is measured in ppm by weight, another is measured in ppm by volume. Another possibility for error.

  • @christelchristely2816
    @christelchristely2816 3 роки тому +1

    Some years ago Hapag Lloyd 3378 made an emergency landing in Vienna because they ran out of fuel. They could not retract the landing gear. Obviously it makes a difference in fuel consumption, but how much drag do they add, especially at a greater hight?

    • @AirspaceVideos
      @AirspaceVideos  3 роки тому +1

      about +180%. I'll make a video on that case soon!

    • @christelchristely2816
      @christelchristely2816 3 роки тому +2

      Wow, you really are on top of your comments! Thank you for your answer and a video would be great!!

    • @AirspaceVideos
      @AirspaceVideos  3 роки тому +3

      you're welcome :)

  • @Arishava
    @Arishava 3 роки тому +6

    can you do something about the clicking in the audio in future videos? i am using headphones (logitech g433) and whenever you talk, there are some audible clicks.

    • @AirspaceVideos
      @AirspaceVideos  3 роки тому +2

      huh, I never noticed. I'll look into it. Thanks for letting me know!

    • @musicnerd72
      @musicnerd72 3 роки тому +3

      @@AirspaceVideos Your audio sounded fine to me.. 🤔

    • @blackbird7575
      @blackbird7575 3 роки тому

      I also hear it, and I am using cheap cheap earphones...

    • @AirspaceVideos
      @AirspaceVideos  3 роки тому

      I tried to fix it, let me know if it is better in my latest video! ("bad decisions")

  • @Megabean
    @Megabean 2 роки тому

    It's funny, I worked for a automotive factory and we all knew what PPM meant, we had to keep our defects lower then a certain ppm. How does someone go through an engineering course and not learn that? Maybe engineer means something different in the EU then it does in Canada...

  • @vjfeefeecat586
    @vjfeefeecat586 3 роки тому +2

    Sometimes Google is not your friend- why do people not ask for help from the right places???!!! Another great video thank you 🙏

  • @kayinoue2497
    @kayinoue2497 2 роки тому

    I'm only guessing here but I'm assuming the correct unit was parts per millilitre.

  • @larrythompson8630
    @larrythompson8630 3 роки тому +1

    Wouldn’t adding 300 POUNDS seem like a lot. I use 4 oz per 40 gallons. For pickup diesel. Knowing it’s a dilute mix for public. (Who think more volume means better). Large applications normally use concentrated amounts. So 1lb 160 gallons? That’s 125lbs? This is why having general understanding matters. You get the “this does not seem right”. Like they said it was human error. Most over the counter stuff clearly is labeled “can be used double strength if needed” and that’s for stuff on the ground. 37x??? That’s over 9 GALLONS of additive to my 40 gallon tank? Shouldn’t that raise a red flag in your mind?

    • @AirspaceVideos
      @AirspaceVideos  3 роки тому +1

      Theoretically, yes, absolutely! But 30kg (sorry, I wrongly said 60kg in the video) per 6200kg of fuel does not necessarily ring an alarm bell. That's still just 0.48% of mass... Quite a small amount! Also, the technician did it for the first time, so he had no reference. Then again, the mistake should not have happened.

  • @Jay-00000
    @Jay-00000 3 роки тому

    What a titan airways

  • @joso5554
    @joso5554 2 роки тому

    So what did he get wrong with the ppm calculation and what does Google have to do with it ?!?

  • @adrijagoswami693
    @adrijagoswami693 2 роки тому

    God this is insane

  • @dannymurphy1779
    @dannymurphy1779 3 роки тому +2

    Hopefully the next guy will try UA-cam.

  • @gooner72
    @gooner72 3 роки тому +1

    It must be the most used phrase on the planet when someone doesn't know something ............ "Google it!!!"

  • @onionring010
    @onionring010 3 роки тому +1

    Ok Google, *crash a random airplane.*

  • @marthinneillapoimichael2495
    @marthinneillapoimichael2495 3 роки тому

    Plot twist: the plane found the web history on someone's phone

  • @aaronaustrie
    @aaronaustrie 3 роки тому +1

    Wow crazy 🤦🏽‍♂️

  • @LudetheDude1
    @LudetheDude1 3 роки тому +1

    5:58 RAT seems to be deployed?

    • @AirspaceVideos
      @AirspaceVideos  3 роки тому +1

      good catch! This plane was filmed at an airbus factory. The landing was probably a test flight involving a test of the RAT.

  • @svjatoslavskabarin1173
    @svjatoslavskabarin1173 3 роки тому +3

    Why not in Swiss-German?? Unsubscribed immediately...

  • @maxfullerton5228
    @maxfullerton5228 Рік тому

    Ah yes the good old half sack approach haha

  • @MultiSniper38
    @MultiSniper38 3 роки тому

    Second video about the same accident or am I stupid?

    • @AirspaceVideos
      @AirspaceVideos  3 роки тому

      pretty sure that's my only video about this.

  • @pabloelsur1624
    @pabloelsur1624 3 роки тому +9

    Luftruum 🤣

  • @hoelefouk
    @hoelefouk 3 роки тому +2

    A doctor googling how to perform open-heart surgery and what is open-heart surgery before the procedure is totally normal, I don't see what's wrong here.

  • @vanstry
    @vanstry 2 роки тому

    The guy isn't an engineer. He's a mechanic. And a poor one at that.

  • @MeaHeaR
    @MeaHeaR 2 роки тому

    é Power-Phull

  • @gilesyful
    @gilesyful 3 роки тому

    Can't remember the last time I had to biocide my car

  • @chandrachurniyogi8394
    @chandrachurniyogi8394 3 роки тому

    a charter airline should operate a fixed fleet of 13 B737-800, B737-900 ER or A321-200 Neo LR (any one of the type not all 3 types) & 5 brand new B777-300 ER in addition to 3 refurbished ex-Delta B767-400 ER!!! cabin configuration business class & premium economy class only!!! no economy class whatsoever!!! as for first class only demand!!!

  • @AdrianNelson1507
    @AdrianNelson1507 3 роки тому

    Trust but verify, even with Google results

  • @davidjma7226
    @davidjma7226 3 роки тому +1

    Engineers measure things huh? Hmmmm....

  • @tylercai
    @tylercai 3 роки тому

    Yo

  • @HOOSlERDADDY
    @HOOSlERDADDY 3 роки тому

    Sounds an awful lot like lucaas

  • @adrianciobotaru9595
    @adrianciobotaru9595 2 роки тому +1

    799 grams IS NOT THE RIGHT ANSWEAR... 620 grams is the correct quantity he should have put in each tank.
    this calculation cand be done by a 6th grade school boy... don't need an engineer...
    So, you say 100 ppm... that means 100 parts, per million... so, in 1 million kg of fuel, he needs to put 100 kg of treatment...
    he puts in each tank 6200 kg of fuel... this means, that the necessary quantity of treatment is: 6200 * 100 / 1000000 = 0.62 kg. That means 620 grams, not 799 grams, as you said.
    I DO NOT UNDERSTAND WHY YOU SAID 799 GRAMS for each tank. How did you come out with that quantity ???
    any 6th grade school boy should be able to calculate this... in my opinion, the blame falls on the shoulders of the MATHS TEACHERS... who don't explain mathematics the right way to kids...

  • @Spidey-tb3tu
    @Spidey-tb3tu 3 роки тому

    Thank goodness I never use google!

  • @hiimjacobifyoudontmindchec5180
    @hiimjacobifyoudontmindchec5180 3 роки тому +1

    scare

  • @МихайлоСєльський
    @МихайлоСєльський 3 роки тому +2

    1. If you messing with simple calculations, blame google)
    2. If product made damage due to huge overdose, ban it!))

  • @TheKasperlkopf
    @TheKasperlkopf 3 роки тому

    Horrible intro lol but your content is great

  • @GreenStarTech
    @GreenStarTech 3 роки тому +1

    Politicians interfering in something they don't understand; which is most things. Put 10 spoons of sugar in a coffee mug and then ban sugar😂😂😂

  • @NadimAJ
    @NadimAJ 3 роки тому +2

    You are not missing anything. EASA logic is mysterious at best

  • @habun_islam
    @habun_islam 3 роки тому +1

    Nice explanation remember me?

  • @kayinoue2497
    @kayinoue2497 2 роки тому

    I'm only guessing here but I'm assuming the correct unit was parts per millilitre.