FIRE & SMOKE IN THE CABIN of Easyjet | Emergency Return to Geneva 

Well, its not the United States 😂

@@EmotionalWeather You must be new around here if you think the US has a monopoly on bad ATC

@@jadawo No it doesn't, but the US is a lot of bad ATC.

You're talking about the swiss here, they make like the best watches

Top notch all round - the pilots used the word "mayday", the controllers reacted immediately and appropriately, and they kept the questions about passengers on board etc. until later on and minimising the risk of overloading the pilots at a particularly difficult moment. The US has much to learn!

That is also standard operating procedure for most ATC with a MAYDAY call. I'd have to go back and confirm, but that might even be included in ICAO guidance.

@@morrij01 I do think it is. However, I don’t see it that often being used. Guess that is due to complex coordination.

Yeah, I'm surprised that doesn't happen more often. I'm a firefighter, and when someone calls a mayday, THAT channel becomes the emergency channel, and everyone bot directly involved with the mayday switches to another channel rather than other way around. Doesn't matter if you're in the air or on the ground, when you're dealing with fire there is absolutely not a second to waste.

@@RT-qd8yl In my unit, we try to clear the frequency already used. However, if the distress traffic leaves the sector, usually we sent them to the respective controller because they know their traffic the best.

It depends a lot on the nature of the emergency. For a fire, landing ASAP is the priority. For most of the types of emergencies, though, it's better to take your time, run through checklists, make sure you understand the problem, and plan out how to deal with it first. A number of crashes have happened in situations that should have resulted in safe landings due to unnecessarily quick reactions without taking the time to sort through the situation first. As far as frequency hand-offs, it also depends a lot on location. It's a lot easier to stay on one frequency in Geneva than it is in, say, New York where you have 3 major passenger hub airports, a major GA airport, and lots of other airports and helipads all a few miles from each other. Just due to traffic density and complexity, the area controlled by any one controller in a place like NYC, SoCal, NorCal, or London is much smaller than at GVA. Avoiding unnecessary handoffs is definitely better for emergency traffic, but the number of necessary ones will be higher in highly congested airspace than in places like Geneva where there's only one moderately-busy airport around.

😅

ATC: Number of people and any hazardous goods on board? Pilot: 191 people and some c**t with an old Samsung Galaxy by the looks of it! First Officer: Good one mate, good one

@@hsmedsvik The ones that went boom are the Note 7, and it was so serious that Samsung actually pushed out an update that would prevent the phone from being able to charge. Why did Samsung do that? I have mixed feelings, because it's not that they wanted to sell more phones, which you'd think is a good thing (corporation not being greedy? That never happens!). However, they were basically forced to brick the phones in that way, because people are apparently stupider than I gave them (dis)credit for, and wouldn't stop using the phones regardless of the fact that the design defect was so severe that it meant every single one of those phones produced would fail within a relatively short period of time (shorter if you leaned on it the wrong way by accident). So they HAD to go "Ok, no toys for you toddlers" basically, because the ADULTS were acting like TODDLERS and not giving up the thing that they should CLEARLY understand is going to do it's best impression of a molotov cocktail at an incredibly unpredictable time in the future.

the people over in NYC could learn a thing or two lol

as a frenchman i hate hearing the french accent lol

Also bravo to onboard crew for dealing with the fire. Scary!

Well done to the cabin crew in containing and extinguishing the fire, they are the hero’s

Im just guessing wildly but they could be running on tighter fuels right now give the cost and not knowing when they could get in they choose to go to lyon instead.

I’m guessing they were approaching fuel minimums.

Lol I mean obviously I understand the basic concept of diverting due to fuel reserves… I think perhaps we’re missing some context, but it seems quite a rookie decision. Massive inconvenience for the airline, and the Mayday aircraft could taxi to stand. No mention at all of closing the airport. Further, the requests to a Mayday status control tower asking runway in use at Lyon was bizarre to say the least.

Geneva have a single runway so if by chance if they have to close down the runway then Ezy would be in trouble assuming minimum fuel. We could assume EZy pilot not knowing the full picture and how bad the situation on the swiss.

@@kerberos623 you may be right but surely they should not be that low on fuel even if they had a 10 minute delay.

Happened to me to, coming in with mayday, total hydraulic failure and gear problems and on short final the Eazy crew asked annoyed if the runway was gonna be closed. Dude I hope not!

@@chrisdiver5100 what the hell is wrong with this eazy group? Buncha noobies? Guys need their hands held?

Yeah, he wasn’t the most helpful guy on frequency. I guess EZY run with tight fuel margins if a 5 min delay means they have to divert. Not only is that unnecessarily tight for their own safety (but operationally allowed if they have the required reserve), but it’s damned unhelpful to anyone else who happens to have an emergency like this that’s less self-inflicted!

Annoying everyone with his passive aggressive questions like an arsewipe

@@BillySugger1965 Indeed.

I think he wanted too have Tea and Crumpets with the the tower. IMO, I found him to chatty for the circumstances. SMH

So that they can start briefing the approach and setting up for it. Sounds like it may have been a very busy sector for them, and considering that they were diverting they likely low fuel this would have been critical for them.

Don't forget these aircraft are flying just a bit faster than your car. 😜 It's less than 90 air miles from Geneva to Lyon. Well within the range of setting up the cockpit and briefing for the approach. Plus notification of company, cabin crew, etc. Lots of changes without even considering ATC & nav radio frequency changes. Geneva ATC was not particularly busy and had at least two controllers working that channel.

I believe they are also on different frequencies with Ezy on Approach and Swiss on Departures

Because he is a selfish PLONKER in a declared emergency.... Did his pass his RT exam !?? What's professional about diverting for 10 min delay. ??? What's professional about such low fuel ?? His diversion should already be inserted in Route 2 of his Flight Management Computer. He continously calls without a statement. ....great airmanship. 250 hour pilot ???

Nothing special in English, but in French? Find a table for two with candlelight and wine, please! ...and i don't even drink wine.

@clqudy She's most likely Swiss 😉

@@alejbahaa8888 Indeed - a French speaking Swiss.

She's Swiss and speaks with a Swiss Romand accent (not much of a difference with French from France but noticeable to those who are from the region).

No doubt. An e-bike battery set my house on fire. I spent a lot of time in an AirBnb!

That's typical in French speaking areas...

Very bad practice. Undermines situational awareness for everyone else. A blight on otherwise exemplary ATC work.

Everyone should speak French, this is must have knowledge like maths, physics…

@@ImpressionsFromEverywhere ICAO Rules. Speak English or the language of the country you are flying over.....Hence French here... The French are worried that English is taking over.....hence all the French... A lot of discrimination against English in France.... for example....even playing pop music in English on the radio...

ATC communications can be in either English or the language of the country. Geneva is in the French-speaking part of Switzerland. It's perfectly acceptable for them to speak French with French-speaking aircraft.

Fire in the cabin can result in a "need to land immediately, shortest possible approach". You want the sequence clear in that case. I think it was an abundance of caution and don't fault ATC for that.

If for example the tyre were to burst on landing leaving the runway potentially filled with FOD, they'd need to close it and divert the emergency aircraft somewhere else.

I saw 3BZ on approach early in the video but we didn't hear any instruction for them to go-around. We only saw them gaining altitude again. Maybe the editor accidentally cut out a communication there for 3BZ?

​@@apertureaviation6417G Most likely on Tower Frequency

@Kichiro Makes you wonder how much reserve fuel that EasyJet was carrying. 10 mins delay and number one for landing. He is diverting. What is about 2% per hour extra burn for extra fuel on a short flight ???? No wonder they call it Sleazy Jet......with very poor drawn out radio when there is a Mayday. . 250 hour pilot radio ??

easyJet Switzerland not Swiss.

@@timf9453 Um no, ... Swissair flight 111. 😳

No it was easyjet. I was in that airplain

I confirm it was easyjet. I was in this airplain.

Seemed like they were worried about having enough fuel to reach their alternate if something went wrong and they had to hold more than 10 minutes.

I'm guessing it's a laptop fire

newspaper said a battery from an electronic cigarette caught fire

@@antoineroquentin2297 Figures. E-cigs were the most common cause of on-board fires in the U.S. last year, even though they're legally required to be disabled (i.e. battery removed, not just turned off) before bringing them on a plane. Unfortunately, people who smoke or vape seem to be disproportionately likely to be people who don't think the rules apply to them or care how their actions affect others (not that that's true of all of them, of course, just a disproportionately large share of them.)

Probably yes - at least it sounds so.

@@vbscript2 People also think "it's only a small battery, what harm can it do"...

Fuel

@@VASAviation makes sense ! thanks for the answer..

I wonder if it was an oxygen mask.

@@markmaki4460 I though also this one. But I cant hear it later in the exchange. The description says cabin / cockpit. I though the cockit had issues too. Glad they managed it fast.

Sounded like it to me, too.

Fire in overhead bin. Battery would be at the top of list for possibilities.

150km by road, less than 100 as the crow flies.

Yes close.. That means those appalling pilots could have copied the ATIS....terminal information at that airport instead of annoying Geneva Approach which is handling extra aircraft due to a Mayday. Especially double calling and asking for a spoon feeding.. Is it Left or Right??...while the Chief Purser changes his nappy.. (Diaper usa)

Yes...normally it's obviously a remote stand. ..

Stand 51 is one of the most remote stands in GVA!

EasyJet Switzerland, apparently a franchise operator

easyJet has several different subsidiaries based in different countries. Since they're technically different airlines for regulatory purposes, they have different callsigns (as well as ICAO airline codes.) Same applies to AirAsia, for example.

thanks!

When easyJet Switzerland (EZS) was founded they took over an airline called TEA Switzerland. TEA's call sign was TopSwiss and EZS never changed it.

Hey thanks. Good info.

@J007 Taylor Interesting. The cabin on a plane is pretty protected. Not sure how climate comes in. I guess the mystery to me is what is flammable, and what ignites the fire. I fly as little as possible. But I'm guessing these videos appeal to frequent flyers. Maybe the audience knows how cabin fires get started. They ARE still rather rare, right?

Usually caused by morons who smoke....no self discipline... I believe this was a small contained fire in an overhead bagage locker caused by a vaping device.....battery !!???

Laptops

@@dirkjanriezebos2240 My laptop has a battery and it never would start a fire. Granted lithium-ion is dangerous enough it cannot be in the cargo hold of a passenger plane. But I have to hear some followup on an actual fire to consider computer batteries the cause.

It was batteries. A passager didn't respect the quota.

It was a prudent move. There was no guarantee 45GJ would be clear of the single runway at Geneva in 10 minutes, better safe than sorry.

Very low reserves!! Mean and Lean airline. Makes you wonder when just 10 mins causes a diversion.... Then he wants spoon feeding.. Makes you wonder? 250 hour pilot...

@@michaelhorne8366 No it was not......he was informed he was number one with just a ten minute delay. The CAA should check out Easy Jets fuel policy. In another 10 minutes ... was it MAYDAY FUEL. ???

@@daftvader4218 Let me rephrase. There was a greater than zero percent chance that the fire on 45GJ could have reflared on final, meaning it would have had to stop on the sole runway and evacuate passengers. As unlikely as it may have been, it was not impossible. Rather than roll the dice, finding himself needing to divert and cutting into reserves, they chose to just cut that risk from the equation and divert. A reasonable and fairly common decision. As to your fuel policy comments, for all we know they may have been flying an unexpected headwind en route, or had to divert due to weather. Without knowing the full history of the flight, it is impossible for anyone to make a call on how "stingy" they were being on fuel. This may in fact be why the diverted in the first place. They knew they were low because of [unknown-to-us factor X] and made the call. The risk of further fuel stress due to this emergency was just not worth it.

@@michaelhorne8366 Not likely.. Reported as a contained locker fire extinguished and monitored by excellent cabin crew. Not a brilliant diversion unless your reserves are pathetically low...an accountants fuel policy? ? It was such a short flight that the cost of carrying extra fuel is minimal......the effect of winds was minimal......the effect of enroute weather minimal... Is there not a minimum distance for a nominated diversion in EZ ? Terrible decision... In ten mins your number one.... You can hear that aircraft is safe... There are a lot of risks in diverting....consider that. .

Yes...makes you wonder. 250 hour pilot in a panic...!!?? What wrong with the Automatic Terminal Information continuously available ?? What sort of equipment do they have on these small jets for getting the weather. ACARS ???

Thanks to Skyguide. The company has a one of (if it is not the one) best formation for ATC in the world.

as they said, due to the nature of the emergency, they could not be sure, runway would be clear after 10 min, so just better safe than sorry..

Potential for blocked runway meaning they’d not have enough fuel to avoid declaring low fuel as of longer enough tonnage to make their alternative

@@X737_ loads of very close suitable airfields. Makes you wonder how much reserve fuel the accountants at Easy Jet let them carry ?? They would have a lot less fuel at Lyon. ...can't wait ten mins !!???

​@@daftvader4218sorry to burst your bubble but fob at easyJet is decided by the captain, not the "accountants". Lots of airfields nearby? Do you know the weather of each of them? What runway lengths? Do they all provide fuel? Or shall we say it was a better decision to not commit to an airport with an active mayday and fly to the commercial alternate? Later they flew back to Geneva to resume the schedule so no flights were cancelled. If you don't know the full picture I would refrain from accusing professionals of making conservative and safe decisions.

Probably approaching fuel minimums.

Min fuel but also the concern that the runway might get blocked by the emergency aircraft. They diverted as a precaution, but the emergency aircraft had already stated that the fire was out and that they expect a normal landing and taxi to the gate. It seems to be a case of doing things strictly by the book versus airmanship.

They cannot even wait ten mins to be number one for the approach. ... What fuel do the accountants let them carry....

@@MattyEngland The accountants fuel... Nothing to do with airmanship. Such a short flight to a busy single runway. .. It therefore costs very little to carry some extra fuel... I don't know what the figure is on small jets... 2.5% per hour ....if that ??

@@EdOeuna Not by my book.. Pathetic airmanship. .. Airmanship starts before you depart...... Poor pre-flight planning . A very short flight to a very busy SINGLE RUNWAY AIRPORT. .. Carrying extra fuel carries a very small penalty.. 2%?? I don't know with small jets ??

Maybe, but that's not a risk worth taking when you have an inbound fire mayday, especially at an airport with only one runway.

He probably could have, but why take that risk when you have an inbound mayday with a cabin fire? Geneva only has one runway, and just because a fire is out doesn't mean it won't reignite.

As a Captain you don't make safety decisions based on what an Ops Clerk tells you....

It's fairly standard to divert to your alternate if you think you're likely to exceed the allocated holding fuel. Many people have lost their lives over pilots deciding to wait just a little longer, only to run out of fuel trying to reach their alternate.

@@MaxVliet Fuel planning starts before departure. .. Going to a very busy single runway airport only a short distance away.........carrying a little extra fuel costs very little. How much does a diversion coat ????

@@daftvader4218 Let's do some napkin math and find out! An A320 burns around 2.5 tons of fuel per hour depending on the weight. Fuel is heavy, so about a third of any extra fuel is going to be burnt just to carry it. If you want an extra hour of flying time, you're going to need to carry 3.75 tons to account for the extra fuel burn. With Jet-A fuel costing €600+ per ton, it will cost €750 just to carry that extra hour of fuel, let alone burn it. Let's say they only add half of that which would give them an extra 30 minutes of holding time, it would cost them €375 extra per flight. That is definitely cheaper than diverting a flight which can easily cost upwards of €100,000... but... Easyjet has 1,700 flights a day, so the added cost just to carry the weight of that extra fuel would be €637,500 a day, or €232 million per year. And its not like this would prevent all or even most diversions as they already carry extra fuel if they expect delays due to strikes or weather, so this would only save a handful of diversions a year at best when something completely unexpected causes a delay of 30 minutes or less on top of what they have already planned for.

Different controllers on different frequencies. Swiss was with Departures, Ezy was with Approach.

Incorrect

@@HighSpeedChaserALL the Geneva Controllers were dealing with a Mayday. ..on ALL frequencies... Your not logical or aware of this ?? That co- pilot was appalling and totally unprofessional. .. Does the Cabin Crew Chief change his nappy...???

250 hour pilot ???

You say that and your not a pilot Excellent point. Even I thought of that and I am pilot. Even call Lyon Approach . Don't these little jets have ACARS?? OR Just wait for the transfer to Lyon and stop interrupting a Mayday for ALL the Geneva Controllers. .. Basic RT exam fail.... Makes you wonder !?? These 250 hour pilots? ???

Easy to speculate from my position on the sofa, sounds like they were having a fuel issue even before the emergency aircraft?

I'm guessing some fuel issue and hence the divert

@@seajCharleston possibly yeah. Not worth the risk.

Because USUALLY a fire onboard means emergency stop on the runway and evacuating passengers. And closes the runway and even the entire airport in some cases. The Mayday pilot did say he could taxi to the stand but that could have changed at any second. If the EasyJet was at bingo fuel then he had to assume the worst and go to the alternate.

Maybe fuel to destination then alternate. Very little time to hold. The fire was already out so no need to evacuate on the runway. They even said they’d taxi to the gate.

@CargoSimPilot58 You don't ask the tower from one city for landing info for another. Talk to centre, or their approach.

@Kichiro "There's no time to contact approach"? That doesn't make sense, he HAS to to get clearance. "He wants to get out of their sector"? She gave him clearance out of their zone to a waypoint. He should have contacted centre and they would handle the approach to Lyon from there. That was a dumb move by BZ at the best of times, and any Mayday requires minimal use of radios by everyone. She gave him the runway # as a courtesy, but finally got fed up and told him to contact the appropriate frequency.

​@@craig7350Ezy was not talking to the controller let alone on the same frequency handling the Mayday

@@HighSpeedChaser ... no clue. Go back to playing video games with your buddies.

@@craig7350 really? would you mind telling me what the frequencies for Geneva Approach and Geneva Deprtures are then? And explaining the different voices of the controllers?

Shows how much reserve fuel those budget airlines keep...

Expected 8-10 minute delay does not equal an 8-10 minute delay.

@@HighSpeedChaser Does it not??? When does a ten min delay not equal a ten min delay to be number one. What if it's a nine min delay... Are you OK??

wtf bro

Strongly disagree. I'm much more interested in understanding the situation broadly than narrowly, or from the ATC seat. Dealing with radio chatter, setting up holds, etc. is very much part of the situation for the ATC to deal with.

Affirm

@@VASAviation oh dear

So true... When there was an emergency. . Sums up his airmanship and operational experience.

Why not? That is permitted

why? he has reason to believe its a serious emergency so its possible the emergency plane won't be able to evacuate the runway in 10 mins. if he has low fuel then its safer for him to divert to Lyon where there are 2 runways operational without any known emergency.

@@benjambreeg You totally miss the point about appalling airmanship and poor RT descipline. ...in not respecting a Mayday.

ICAO Rules allow that...English or language of that country. .

@@daftvader4218 yea I know, but still, it is nice if You want to be sure that everyone will understand what You talk about :)

@@gregmos1994 I totally agree ..it seems to be a French culture problem ....!!??

@@daftvader4218 again,.. you seems to have obsessions with us. you seems to have a culture problem with the english domination.

And then have the plane drop out of the sky for lack of fuel?

Why

@@HighSpeedChaser @VASAviation mine,of course, was a provocation . it is right for the pilot to consider going on the alternate, but during an emergency, communications should be kept to a minimum. He could have avoided even asking for the runway in use at lion and stuck to the bare minimum.

Probably a 250 hour pilot ???

How do you know they aren't fluent? Also, get used to it. Most of the world is like that to some extent. What's even more daft/dangerous is US crew and controllers insisting on not using standard phraseology to the determent of all non native speakers on frequency. French is also one of the ICAO languages.

French is an official ICAO language. Other than the EZY all the other aircraft including the emergency one understood French. Didn't make any difference here.

When has a loss of SA because of non-English ever caused a fatality?

The ICAO rule is you speak English or the Official Language of that country you are flying over.

@@EdOeuna Excellent point. Also, crews/ATC with not great English trying to speak English has actually led to numerous fatalities.

get lost, World turns without you.

French is approved

might be approved there, but internationally it’s really a safety factor. i am speaking as an atco in germany - it’s frightening how bad the communication with many french pilots is, due to their lack of english knowledge

SA Len The international language of international aviation is English OR the official language of the country you are flying over. Hence the French. In most countries ALL pilots use English for situational awareness but some French have a big chip on their shoulder !! About English !! Look at that other comment.. From Oct J....they have a big inferiority complex ....

@@daftvader4218 you are right. the official language of the country might be approved. so in switzerland that would be french, german and italian. lets assume the controller would talk to the air france guy in french, to the lufthansa in german and to the ITA in italian, to all the others in english…. even if its allowed especially in a situation like this everyone should be able to communicate in one language. french people do really have some kind inferiority complex when it comes to their language - which is nothing but unprofessional in my opinion.

She was amazing. French is permitted.

@@VASAviation hi VAS long time subscriber I love your work. Yes I am aware its permittedI am ex crew and CDG was a regular trip for me 2-3 times a week but my point was I think it sets a dangerous precedent within the English ATC laws and could result in miscommunication.

​@@wokeupandsmellthecoffee214 The precedent for speaking French over French airspace was set by Marconi. It's one of the oddities of ATC that French/English is spoken when flying over France and is considered normal. I get your point, but it's a long established norm that all aircrew are used to.

I agree that it shouldn't be permitted, but it is, so you can't blame the controller

@@marcellkovacs5452 I totally agree with you, its the French ATC body to blame, however she could keep the transmissions to English if she wanted to.

nobody cares about the gate number dude. get a life please.

Indeed.