Posts Tagged ‘Airports’
* Plane caught fire while parked at Heathrow on Friday
* Investigators say no evidence of link to batteries
* In separate incident, another Dreamliner turned back
* Airline says it has replaced components, plane OK to fly
By Estelle Shirbon
LONDON, July 13 (Reuters) – Investigators classified the fire that broke out on a Boeing 787 Dreamliner parked at London’s Heathrow airport as a “serious incident” but have found no evidence it was caused by the plane’s batteries, Britain’s Air Accidents Investigation Branch (AAIB) said on Saturday.
The question of whether the fire was connected to the batteries is crucial because the entire global fleet of Dreamliners, Boeing’s groundbreaking new flagship jet, was grounded for three months this year due to battery-related problems.
The AAIB designation fell just short of a full-blown “accident” on the scale it uses to describe investigations. The agency’s preliminary probe is expected to take several days, opening up Boeing to more questions about its top-selling plane.
Despite the uncertainty surrounding the blaze, airlines around the world continued to operate the Dreamliner. Some 18 787s took to the skies Saturday afternoon, about the same as Friday.
The fire broke out on the Ethiopian Airlines plane on Friday afternoon, and was discovered when smoke was seen on the plane eight hours after arriving from Addis Ababa. No one was injured.
“There has been extensive heat damage in the upper portion of the rear fuselage, a complex part of the aircraft, and the initial investigation is likely to take several days,” the AAIB said in a statement.
“However, it is clear that this heat damage is remote from the area in which the aircraft main and APU (Auxiliary Power Unit) batteries are located, and, at this stage, there is no evidence of a direct causal relationship.”
The Financial Times on Saturday reported that airline staff had discovered a problem with the aircraft’s air conditioning system during a routine inspection and had seen sparks but no flames.
The Times, quoting Mark Mangooni, Ethiopian Airlines’ senior manager in Britain, did not make clear when this had happened. Reuters could not reach Mangooni for comment.
Separately, Britain’s Thomson Airways said one of its Dreamliners that turned back during a flight from Manchester to Sanford in Florida on Friday had suffered a “minor technical issue” and had now had a small number of components replaced.
Thomson said the aircraft had been fully tested and was being taken back into service at once. The airline declined to specify which components had been replaced.
Thomson Airways, owned by the world’s largest tour operator TUI Travel, has a total of three Dreamliners and all are now operating normally, the airline said.
Britain’s Sky News television channel said it had learnt that some 100 Thomson passengers had called the airline’s cancellation line asking to know if they were booked to fly on a Dreamliner. Sky News did not give a source for the information and Thomson declined to comment.
The Heathrow and Manchester incidents were a new blow for Boeing after the entire global fleet of Dreamliners had to be grounded for three months, ending in April, after one high-tech battery caught fire and another overheated.
Boeing shares closed down 4.7 percent at $101.87 on Friday, knocking $3.8 billion off the company’s market capitalization.
“SMOKE THROUGHOUT FUSELAGE”
Several airlines said they were continuing to operate their Dreamliners, including United Continental, the Polish airline LOT, Japan Airlines and ANA, the world’s biggest operator of the 787.
Heathrow briefly closed both its runways to deal with Friday’s fire, causing delays and cancellations, but was back to normal operations on Saturday.
Footage from the scene of the fire showed apparent scorching on the fuselage near the tail. The Dreamliner’s two batteries are in compartments located low down near the front and middle of the plane.
The Ethiopian Airlines Dreamliner has been moved to a hangar at Heathrow where it is under technical investigation, the AAIB said, adding that the initial witness and physical evidence showed there had been smoke throughout the fuselage.
The AAIB said the U.S. National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB), representing the state of design and manufacture, and the Civil Aviation Authority of Ethiopia, representing the state of registry and operator, had been invited to appoint accredited representatives to participate in the investigation.
The AAIB also said it had also invited the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration, Boeing, Ethiopian Airlines, the European Aviation Safety Agency and Britain’s Civil Aviation Authority to participate as advisers to the investigation.
Boeing will be keen to reassure airlines, travellers and investors over the cause of the fire as quickly as possible but under aviation rules it will be up to investigators to decide how much information to release and when.
Ethiopian Airlines, one of Africa’s top five carriers, said it would continue to fly its Dreamliner fleet. It has ordered a total of 10 Dreamliners, of which four have been delivered.
“After a normal flight from Addis to London, passengers disembarked in the morning and the aircraft was cleaned. It was towed to a remote parking area as usual and parked properly with all internal and external powers switched off,” said an official from the airline’s public relations department.
Boeing’s 787 Dreamliner has hit its latest problem — Japanese airline ANA says that three of its 20-strong fleet have shown an electrical wiring issue with their engine fire extinguishers. An airline spokesperson told Reuters that the discovery was first made during pre-flight maintenance in Tokyo.
787 BOUND FOR HELSINKI FORCED TO TURN BACK
It’s not yet known whether the fault could stop the extinguishers working in the event of a fire, but Japan Airlines, a competitor of ANA, said it forced a 787 bound for Helsinki to turn back for examination. The airline says it is currently performing similar checks on its fleet of ten Dreamliners.
The sophisticated 787 has suffered a litany of setbacks since its maiden US flight last year, with airlines worldwide grounding their fleet until Boeing found a solution for a battery issue. The aircraft went back into active service earlier this year, but has continued to run into problems; last month an Ethiopian Airlines 787 caught fire while parked at London’s Heathrow airport, causing both runways to be closed.
Source: – The Verge
- A company spokesman announced that each of the survivors will get $10,000 in initial compensation
- Accepting the payment will not keep the survivors from suing the company for more money in the future
- 83 passengers have already brought a lawsuit against the plane’s manufacturer, Boeing
- That lawsuit may eventually expand to include the South Korean airline
- 304 people were on the Boeing 777 when it crash landed at San Francisco International Airport on July 6
- Three died and 181 were injured in the crash landing
Passengers on the Asiana Airlines flight that crashed at San Francisco International Airport last month will get $10,000 in initial compensation from the airline.
This initial payment is for medical and transportation costs for the 288 surviving passengers, and the company may give more after the U.S. National Transportation Safety Board concludes it’s investigation of the incident, company spokesman Lee Hyo Min said Saturday.
The company is offering the money while the investigation is ongoing so injured survivors have the money they need now – though all passengers will receive the $10,000 amount.
‘This is a minimum payment we are offering for all passengers, regardless of whether they were injured or not,’ she said.
And accepting the money does not prevent survivors from being able to sue the company in the future.
All the company is asking for is a receipt that the passengers accepted the payment. Lee said there would be no agreement attached to accepting the money.
Already a group of 83 passengers has launched a lawsuit, but against plane’s manufacturer Boeing, not Asiana. Though it could be expanded later to include the airline.
Asiana, the second-largest airline in South Korea, will take a big financial hit from the crash. It’s estimated that they will lose 20billion won.
Asiana Flight 214 crash landed at San Francisco International Airport on July 6, while coming in from Incheon, South Korea.
Source: – DailyMail UK
Civil aviation industry’s apex body IATA has opposed the GMR Hyderabad International Airport (GHAIL) plan for a 100 per cent increase in international aircraft landing fee.
The move will hurt airline operations, IATA has said, requesting the Airports Economic Regulatory Authority of India (AERA) to relook the proposal.
IATA expressed the views at the recent stakeholder consultation meeting held by the AERA with regard to the determination of aeronautical tariffs at the Rajiv Gandhi International Airport, Hyderabad.
IATA Assistant Director Malvyn Tan, while expressing the body’s views on the issue, said airport charges should be in line with International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) principles.
He said it does not make sense to have different tariff structures for international and domestic airlines, as the same aircraft type originating from either a domestic or an international source will utilise the same resources.
GMR currently charges Rs. 250.50 per ton and Rs. 187.90 per ton for international and non-international aircrafts up to 100 tons respectively as landing charges. A surcharge of Rs. 336.60 per ton (international) and Rs. 252.50 per ton (non-international) is levied if the flights exceed the weight limit. It also collects Rs. 4.10 per hour per ton as parking charges for aircrafts up to 100 tons, and levies Rs. 5.40 per hour per ton for exceeding the weight limit.
An aircraft with a maximum certified seat capacity of less than 80 — as certified by the DGCA — which is operated by a domestic scheduled operator is exempt from landing charges payment.
Mr. Tan said that in view of the margin for all airlines being under pressure, a 100 per cent increase in the international landing fee will have an impact on their operations. “It should have been kept unchanged, especially since any increase in the landing fee will not result in a reduction of the User Development Fee (UDF),” he added. The official has requested AERA for two weeks’ time for submitting IATA’s details on the issue.
An Emirates representative said the airline will support single till as per authority for tariff determination. However, he added that it is not the time for a 100 per cent increase in landing charges, as the industry is facing volatile times.
Singapore Airlines, while endorsing the views of IATA, stated that any increase in landing tariffs will have a negative impact on airline operations. Air India voiced a similar opinion as well.
Yashwant S Bhave, AERA Chairperson, in response to the opinions expressed by the airlines and the IATA, said the proposed increase in the landing charges appears to be high as there has been no increase since 2001 — except for a ten per cent hike in 2009.
“The aeronautical tariff and revenue basket has different components like landing, parking, housing charges, and the UDF. The authority has attempted to keep a balance amongst these different components,” he remarked.
AERA will accept comments and suggestions on the consultation paper up to July 22, 2013.
Source: – IndiaTV News
MUMBAI: After angadias emerged from anonymity following a recent raid on trucks filled with cash, gold and diamonds, people have been asking if a person carrying a lot of money and valuables can be pulled up for doing so, especially if one is flying. Can a flyer be refused security clearance for carrying cash and valuables above a limit? The rules are different for international and domestic travel.
For travelling abroad, one needs to be careful about one’s baggage. It is usual for one to carry jewellery, cash and expensive gadgets, but unless one declares the goods and their value before leaving, one can fall into customs’ net upon return. As per customs rules, for carrying gold and expensive items from India to other countries, one needs to procure a certificate from the precious cargo complex a day in advance. Upon return, the certificate can be shown to customs to claim duty exemption. “The traveller can thus leave the airport without any hassle,” said an officer from the Air Intelligence Unit.
What about bringing home goods bought abroad? “One needs to pay duty if one brings into the country things that cost more than a certain limit,” said a customs official. The duty is 36% for goods worth more than Rs35,000. For gold, the duty regime is more liberal for women, the allowance being amounts costing up to Rs 20,000. For men, the limit is Rs 10,000. Amounts of gold above these limits attract a duty of 36%. As for cash, one is allowed to bring into the country $5 000 and an equal amount in traveller’s cheques (above what one declared at the time of leaving India).
Customs officials say travellers should never knowingly hide valuables to escape duty. “If discovered, they need to pay a fine apart from duty. It could also lead to an arrest and a court case,” said an official. “In 20-30% of the cases, the intention is not smuggling, but the cases are classified as such.”
What about domestic travel? Well, there is no rule on carrying cash, gold, jewels or gadgets, which means one can carry whatever one feels like and in any quantity. “We do not set limits on such items as they do not pose a haz ard to aircraft security,” said an official of the Bureau of Civil Aviation Security.
But then the income tax dep a r t m e n t comes into the picture. “If the department receives a tipoff that someone is carrying a huge quantity of cash, its officials can stop and interrogate the flyer,” said an officer. “If one can produce a receipt or otherwise show the origin of the cash, there is no problem.”
(Inputs by Manju V)
Source: – TimesOfIndia
SAN FRANCISCO: A probe into Asiana Flight 214 focused squarely on the pilots after the head of the US National Transportation Safety Board said investigators found no evidence of mechanical problems.
In her final briefing before the agency concluded its on-site detective work, NTSB chairman Deborah Hersman said on Thursday the airplane showed no signs of a breakdown, and on voice recorders, the pilots of the Boeing 777 fail to notice that their approach is dangerously low and slow until it’s too late.
“There is no mention of speed until about nine seconds before impact, when they’re at 100 feet (30 meters),” she said on Thursday. Just seconds before impact, two of the pilots call for the landing to be aborted.
Investigators have stressed that nothing has been definitively ruled out and no firm conclusions reached. The agency’s final evaluation is expected to take more than a year.
The jet itself, though heavily damaged, had no malfunctions in any critical systems, including the engines and flight-control surfaces, the autopilot, the autothrottles and the flight director, Hersman said.
Two Chinese teens were killed and 180 of the 307 people on board were hurt on Saturday when the airliner slammed into a seawall at the end of the runway. The impact ripped off the back of the plane, tossed out three flight attendants and scattered pieces of the jet across the runway as it spun and skidded to a stop.
The battered passengers, some with broken bones, were told over the jet’s public address system to stay in their seats for another 90 seconds while the cockpit consulted with the control tower, a safety procedure to prevent people from evacuating into life-threatening fires or machinery.
Authorities are investigating whether one of the two teens who died may have been run over by a fire truck rushing to the burning jet.
The Federal Aviation Administration has found “no significant issues” during 134 unannounced mechanical, pilot or avionic checks on Aviana airliners over the last 18 months, Hersman said.
She has said that pilots Lee Gang-kuk, who was landing the jet for his first time at the San Francisco airport, and Lee Jeong-Min, who was training him, were ultimately responsible for a safe landing.
While the pilots were manually flying the jet for the landing, as expected on a clear, sunny day, they told investigators they thought the airliner’s speed was being controlled by an autothrottle set for 157 mph (252 kph).
Inspectors found that the autothrottle had been “armed,” or made ready for activation, Hersman said. But investigators are still determining whether it had been engaged. In the last two minutes, there was a lot of use of autopilot and autothrottle, and investigators are going to look into whether pilots made the appropriate commands and if they knew what they were doing, she said.
Experts said the evidence points toward pilot error.
Lee Collins, a pilot with 29 years of experience on a variety of airliners, said the question is how the Asiana pilots could make such a “gross error.”
“What caused this airplane to crash was their failure to maintain proper airspeed,” Collins said.
During the evacuation, many passengers jumped out the back of the plane or slid down inflated slides through emergency exits. Then, said some, an unnerving wait began. Emergency phone tapes recorded frantic callers, pleading for help.
“We’ve been on the ground, I don’t know, 20 minutes, a half hour,” said one woman. “There are people laying on the tarmac with critical injuries, head injuries. We’re almost losing a woman here. We’re trying to keep her alive.”
San Francisco fire department spokeswoman Mindy Talmadge said some passengers may not have immediately seen ambulances at the scene because they were dispatched to a nearby staging area, as first responders assessed who needed to be taken to the hospital.
“You don’t cause more chaos in an already chaotic situation,” Talmadge said. “You don’t do that with 50 ambulances running around all over the place.”
Within 18 minutes of receiving word of the crash, five ambulances and more than a dozen other rescue vehicles were at the scene or en route, and airport fire crews and crews from other agencies were already on the scene, Talmadge said.
“Our response was immediate,” Talmadge said. “It’s not what you may see in the movies. That’s not how a real-life response is to a large-scale incident.”
The fiery crash landing of a Korean jetliner at the San Francisco International Airport late Saturday morning has left at least two people dead, and up to 70 injured, according to NBC Bay Area station KNTV. Hospitals say some of the injured are critical. NBC’s Lester Holt reports.
By Erin McClam and Daniel Arkin, NBC News
A Boeing 777 jetliner with 307 people on board crashed and caught fire at San Francisco International Airport on Saturday after a flight across the Pacific Ocean from South Korea. Two people were killed and scores injured, authorities said.
The plane, Asiana Airlines Flight 214 from Seoul, apparently hit the lip of the seawall that separates the runway from San Francisco Bay, sources told NBC News, then slammed into the ground and skidded down the runway before coming to rest in an adjacent field, its tail sheared off and the fuselage spewing black smoke. Photos and video from the scene showed passengers sliding down the emergency chutes and walking away.
Despite the deaths and scores of injuries — many of them serious — San Francisco Mayor Edwin Lee said at a evening news conference that “This could have been much worse.”
Federal investigators said it was too early to determine a cause. A representative of the National Transportation Safety Board arrived on scene late Saturday and took control of the investigation.
The sources who spoke with NBC News said the pilot did not make a distress call before landing. The plane crashed in favorable weather — partly cloudy skies and light wind.
Joanne Hayes-White, the San Francisco fire chief, said there were 307 people on board — 291 passengers and 16 crew — and all had been accounted for. Authorities said 182 people were taken to one of nine Bay Area hospitals, including 49 with serious injuries. Hospitals reported that the injuries included burns and fractures.
She said first-responders who arrived at the jet saw a handful of survivors emerging from the bay.
“We did observe some of the passengers coming out of the water. But the plane certainly was not in the water. There was a fire on the plane, so the assumption might be that they went near the water’s edge which is very shallow to maybe douse themselves with water.”
The bodies of the two people who were killed were found on the runway, according to Hayes-White.
South Korea’s transport ministry said the two who died were Chinese citizens.
Benjamin Levy, who was on the plane, described hearing a lot of screaming after the landing. He told NBC Bay Area that he also saw many head injuries, but that most of the passengers appeared to make it off the plane safely. Fire crews sprayed water and retardant foam to douse the flames.
“We were approaching perfectly well, but we were too low,” he said. “When the pilot realized it, he put some more gas to correct it, but it was too late, so we hit the runway pretty bad, and we started going up in the air again, and we landed pretty hard.”
Stefanie Turner, a witness, told MSNBC that she saw the plane clip the runway with its tail, then come to rest with flames and smoke billowing from the fuselage.
“The tail was too low. Instead of coming in flat it was coming in at, I would say, maybe a 45-degree angle, with the tail far too low,” she said. “It really went through quite a few acrobatics on the runway.”
Besides the 61 Americans, the airline said the jet carried 77 Koreans, 141 Chinese, three passengers from India, one each from Japan and Vietnam and seven whose nationalities were unknown.
The crash — the first involving a jumbo jet in the United States in more than a decade — happened at 11:27 a.m. local time. It left a field of debris down the runway, beginning at the seawall that divides the runway from San Francisco Bay. Pieces of the tail could be seen among the wreckage.
An air traffic control recording captured a controller saying: “Emergency vehicles are responding. We have everyone on the way.”
David Eun, an executive with Samsung Electronics who was on the flight, posted to his Twitter account: “I just crash landed at SFO. Tail ripped off. Most everyone seems fine. I’m ok.” He also posted a photo that showed people walking or running away from the downed plane, including at least a half-dozen who appeared to have slid down an emergency chute.
Eun previously worked at Google and AOL. Sheryl Sandberg, a friend of his and the chief operating officer of Facebook, said that she was supposed to be on Asiana 214 with family and colleagues but that they switched to a different airline to use frequent-flier miles.
The airline said on Twitter that it was investigating and would have news as soon as possible. It offered thoughts and prayers for the passengers and crew.
The deaths are the first in an accident involving a 777, a wide-body, twin-engine jet that has been in service since 1995 and is known as the Triple-7. Before Saturday, the most serious 777 accident was in January 2008, when a British Airways flight landed short and skidded onto the runway, injuring 47 people. The jet in Saturday’s crash had been in service since 2006.
San Francisco International suspended all takeoffs and landings for four hours after the crash and said that some flights were being diverted. Two of its four runways later reopened. The airport advised passengers to check with their airlines.
President Barack Obama, at the Camp David retreat in Maryland, was made aware of the crash and was in touch with federal, state and local authorities, a White House official said.
The last crash of a jumbo jet in the United States was in November 2001, when American Airlines Flight 587, an Airbus A300-600 airliner, crashed in a New York neighborhood. The last fatal crash of any commercial plane in the U.S. was in February 2009, when a Continental Airlines regional flight crashed into a house near Buffalo, N.Y., killing 49 people.
The flight tracking service FlightAware said that Asiana 214 flew about 10 and a half hours after taking off from Incheon airport at 5:04 p.m. local time, about half an hour late. The flight had originated in Shanghai, China.
The service identified the model as a Boeing 777-200, which has a wingspan of almost 200 feet and can carry as many as 440 people. The manufacturing company Pratt & Whitney said the plane was powered by its PW4000 engines.
Federal sources told NBC News that there was no indication of terrorism. The National Transportation Safety Board said it was sending a full team to San Francisco. Boeing said it was gathering information.
“Our thoughts are with everyone affected by today’s incident at SFO,” Boeing said on its Twitter account. “We stand ready to assist the NTSB.”
NBC News’ Julie Yoo, Le Li, Jay Blackman, Jonathan Dienst, Richard Esposito, Tracy Jarrett and Kristen Welker contributed to this report. The Associated Press also contributed.
Source: – NBC News USA
Get ready! The A350 XWB will make its maiden voyage on Friday 14 June 2013 (weather permitting). Airbus will bring you this all-access backstage pass on a part of aviation history. We will welcome special Airbus guests and flight test experts with real-time commentary. So join us to experience the event live as if you were there!
LONDON: Air India flights landing in Britain’s biggest airport will now have to watch out how noisy their aircraft are. Heathrow has become the first major airport that has decided to name and shame noisy airlines.
A new “Fly Quiet” scheme will rank airlines on the amount of noise their engines make. Airlines with loudest engines will have to pay a hefty fine.
Heathrow is the UK’s only international hub airport, handling nearly 70 million passengers a year, and connecting the UK to 183 destinations around the world in 90 different countries. Aircraft noise is a significant issue for local residents living nearby.
European research shows that around 6% of people are “highly annoyed” by road traffic noise above 55 decibel while a higher proportion – between 10-28% – are highly annoyed by aircraft. Heathrow officials said, “This shows that noise from aircraft is seen as more disturbing.”
“Heathrow is at the forefront of international efforts to tackle aircraft noise. Airlines are rewarded for flying quieter planes, and penalized when they do not. New procedures for aircraft landing which reduce the noise experienced under the flight path have been pioneered. As a result, even though the number of planes using the airport has gone up, fewer people are affected by noise today than at any time since the 1970s. But despite these efforts, noise remains an issue,” they added.
Heathrow already has some of the toughest noise restrictions in the world, which have resulted in important benefits for residents in terms of reduced noise. For example, aircraft flying in and out of Heathrow are on average 15% quieter than the other planes flying in the fleets of the same airlines which land at other world airports.
As a result of the rules and incentives in place at Heathrow, airlines are increasingly using their newest and quietest planes on early morning routes. For example, Qantas, Singapore Airlines and Malaysian Airlines have all replaced their noisier Boeing 747-400s with the A380 that has a 40% smaller noise footprint.
Cathay Pacific has also changed to quieter Boeing 777 aircraft. British Airways will start to take delivery of A380s from summer 2013 and “we expect some of those to be used on its early morning flights. The use of quieter aircraft at night means the average noise per night movement has already fallen by 20% and this trend is set to continue. We will continue to use landing charges to provide an additional incentive for the use of the quietest planes at night,” Heathrow officials told TOI.
Colin Matthews, CEO of Heathrow said, “Heathrow encourages the quietest aircraft through higher charges for the noisiest aircraft and reduced charges for the quietest aircraft. The airport will be proposing a significant increase in fines for airlines that break noise limits and, later this year, launching a ‘Fly Quiet’ programme which will publicly rank airlines according to their noise performance at Heathrow”.
The airport also offers noise insulation for community buildings and homes, financial assistance with relocating to “quieter” areas and campaign for local planning authorities to restrict new developments in the noisiest areas. From 2014, we plan to launch a new “Quieter Homes” programme incorporating lessons from a pilot we are currently running.
The number of “night flights” permitted at Heathrow is restricted by an annual ‘cap’ and there are noise restrictions on aircraft departing late at night and early in the morning.
Heathrow also has a voluntary ban in place for arrivals scheduled to land between 4.30am and 6am not to touch down before 4.30am. In addition, departures are not scheduled between 11pm and 6am.
Source: – TimesOfIndia
KOLKATA: It was a nerve-wracking 30 minutes for 179 passengers and crew on board an IndiGo Airlines flight from Kolkata to Dibrugarh on Thursday as the plane flew through 200km of extreme turbulence with a cracked cockpit windshield.
Flight 6E 205 took off at 12.57pm and hit turbulence almost immediately. Just as the aircraft was heading into clear weather at 35,000ft, the pilots saw the windshield crack. Deciding to return to Kolkata, they put the plane in a dive to lose altitude quickly, ease the pressure and prevent the glass from popping out.
The pilot informed the passengers they were returning to Kolkata because of a technical fault. “There were grumbles in the passenger cabin. We were almost halfway through,” recounted Oil India’s H Singh.
The sharp descent and the turbulence increased tension in the cabin. “The loss in altitude was in sudden bursts,” said businessman Khaled Khan who was travelling with his mother. “The aircraft would go into a freefall, hold for a while and go into another drop. Passengers already knew there was some problem with the aircraft. The extreme turbulence freaked them out. I began to think about my daughter and pray for mercy. People were either screaming or praying.”
Since all the passengers and crew had their seatbelts fastened, there were no injuries. To everyone’s relief, the plane touched down safely at Kolkata airport at 1.59pm. The passengers took off for Dibrugarh in another aircraft at 3.32pm.
According to the airline, there was no danger since only one layer of the three-layered windshield had cracked. An airline official said had the flight gone on to land in Dibrugarh, the plane would have been stranded there till engineers and technicians flew in from Kolkata.
Source: – TimesOfIndia