Hello All,

Wanted to write to you all about our recent experiences.

We were flying HKG-LHR on CX255 9/5/06. The aircondition system was broken. It was pumping out hot air instead of cold.

Before take off the flight was already HOT on the ground. After take off, it got even HOTTER. In fact by my estimtae it was 35-40C on board, no wind and hot dry air. The captain announced that they are 'working on it' Then nothing for 2 hours. After 2 hours, passengers were falling sick, with people lying on floor of the aisles in eco covering themselves with wet napkins. Some passengers who had heat exaustion were brought up front to business class galley to sit on crew seats and be fanned and covered in wet cloths by stewerdesses.

Overall we were in a furnace and it was torture. After 2 hours the captain decided he couldn't make it to London so turned around and headed back to HK.

A baby seated next to us was stripped down to his bare diapers.

Thankfully nothing serious happened, as I am certain it was possible if we went any longer that a passenger could have fallen seriously sick.

After landing my wife spoke to her friend who is a reporter for SCMP. She took interest, and the story was published today on the Front Page of the Main post.

The article was online all morning on SCMP.com, but funnily enough dissapeared in the afternoon.

There was even a humorous cartoon in the collums section.

They are both still online in the HK section. scmp.com always updates its front page with new stories in the afternoon to attempt to differentiate the online version as a "round the clock" news source from the once-per-day print version.

I liked the quote from one Ms Hira:

"My driver in economy class told me the situation was even worse there"

The whole story as told by her just had me thinking "I'm glad I wasn't sitting next to her for those 4 hours!" (but then if I read the above post correctly it was Globalman (aka Mr Hira) who had that pleasure). I wouldn't be at all surprised if she used the "don't you know who I am" line to the cabin crew to get priority with the ice and damp towels

As far as I can tell the Cabin Crew seemed to have been doing everything they possibly could to help people out.

The cabin crew themselves must have suffered through the flight - and they couldn't even strip down to the bare minimum!

Wonder why the airline decided to fly back to HK instead of finding the nearest international airport? I mean, it was 4 hours on before the pilot decided to turn back, which meant another 4 hours of torture in the hot cabin...!

EDITED to add an excerpt from the SCMP: So the aircraft turned back after 2 hours, and not 4 as reported above by OP.

I'd say "Cool!" but that would be just fanning the flames.

2 hrs out of HKG to LHR would be right in the middle of China, with its ridiculously restricted airspace and likely, a huge number of visitors without proper visas.

Sounds like an awful flight, though.

Christep,

Yes this is Globalman AKA MR. HIRA, Thank you very much for your snide insensitive comments, I won't even bother to reply specifically to what you said, only to give you the suggestion that perhaps in future you should please think before you type.

Perhaps this exercise may help you to learn some empathy for others: Try parking your car in the sunshine on a hot summer's day in Hong Kong and then switch off the air-conditioning and keep the windows closed. After four hours, tell me how you would feel.

But then again judging from your comments you already seem so full of hot air to begin with, I don't think you would even notice the heat.

My wife was good enough to spread out to the world the suffering of 222 passengers. The airline took a gamble with us, they gambled that they could fix something mid air that was clearly broken on the ground before takeoff (The air-conditioning), when they had other options (CHANGE THE PLANE OR FIX THE FAULT FIRST). We all suffered as a consequence.

You may ask, "What�s the big deal? We all lived after all!" But I can reply to you that the flight was utter torture, and there was no relief. Do we, in our society condone torture? The answer is of course no. How about torture where there is no physical damage done to the person tortured (types of torture that leave no physical mark)? The answer is of course no as well.

My wife was simply bringing that information to the attention of the world. Why did she do that? So that Cathay Pacific, which is a lovely airline almost all of the time, will be shamed to never ever gamble with passenger�s safety again. Considering the number of people I saw myself, who were succumbing to symptoms of heat exposure by the end, I only can Thank God that no person fell seriously ill.

She did give high praises to the SCMP regarding the crew, but they did not mention it, and so was beyond our control. We did complain to the airline about the incident, but we also wrote to the airline to give high praise to the way the crew handled everything. I really don't think even one single passenger on that flight took issue with any of the crew as far as I could see.

My wife is the passenger who went to the ISM and suggested that she use the Evian Spray from the restrooms to cool passengers down, which they did (they had plenty of stock inside), which was of benefit to every single passenger on that aircraft.

We fly 150k miles a year. We do this together (MR & MRS. HIRA) for 4 years now. Sometimes we can go through turbulence, or through long delays, we've even taken off and come back and landed 3 times now (separate incidents), but nothing has ever shaken us. However this flight shook us up. So much so we put our trip off by 1 week. We have never done that before.

So please don't go around poking fun in public at things that you really don't know about. It�s very rude, and reflects poor taste. Again I reiterate, in future please think before you type.

Maybe he just said out loud what most of us were thinking anyway.....

And in response to Guy Betsy & others:

The whole flight (outbound + return was 4 hours) going was about 2 hours 15 minutes, and return took I estimate 1 hour 45 minutes. When looking at the map, they took a bit of a zig-zag route outbound, but a very straight return route. I understood the reason, which is because CX255 would reach London too early to land (before 6am not allowed to land), so they have to take a longer than needed route while outbound to reach by 6am, for the return, my best guess is that they declared some sort of emergency, which allowed them to fly outside of normal corriders and take a straight route back.

I also thought about landing nearby, but I am pretty certain that they probably wouldn't allow any passengers off the airplane until certain formalities are done, so that means we would probably be stuck onboard for alot further time. I agree 100% with the captains decision to return to HK, but felt that he should have circled and landed much much sooner (within 30 minutes after takeoff he should have made up his decision of turning around.). An hour in the air (round trip) I would understand and could tolerate, but 4 hours was mad.

This doesn't reflect well on whoever said this, either. Reminds me of Marie Antoinette.

Big difference: in my car I would be suffering from a lack of oxygen and would likely eventually suffocate, on this flight the ventilation system was still on so it still pumped in fresh air (even though it was warm) so there was no real danger from suffocation.


Ok, so you were in a plane that had an interior temperature of around 35-40C. Sounds like the outdoor temperature in a lot of places in the summer, only, you did not have to suffer from the effects of the Sun's rays. Have you ever been outside in the heat for 4 hours? I have, and yes, it's not comfortable, but really, it's far from torture, and if you drink lots of fluids, you'll be fine.

This doesn't prove that they knew of the problem beforehand. The A/C system sometimes doesn't gets pumped up before take off, although if it was very very hot somebody should have noticed.

And how did this affect safety at all? As I said above, there was obviously no risk of suffocation, and even if there was no ventilation at all on a aircraft you have oxygen.

chrisep may not have been very courteous in his post, but with respect, Mrs Hira's statement regarding her driver may seem even more offensive.

This is an internet frequent flyer forum, and I think it is absolutely fine to poke fun at people in the media. Mrs Hira chose to have her statement put on the record and published, so naturally the public has the right to comment.

Globalman, I understand how you feel about this. I myself have said stupid things on the record and have suffered the consequences. I am also frequently critized by many people. Sometimes they are right, sometimes they are just attacking me for no real reason. No matter who is right, I always try to keep my cool, take it easy, and learn from the experience.

Wow, what a tortuous flight! Any actual measures of cabin air temp? I can visualize the hot, closed car w/o air con in HKG... and I'm already starting to perspire! Glad all returned safely.

I think in this case it depends on how you read it. I think you can read it as someone who is talking with their nose in the air or as someone who was just giving an description of the situation as they saw it. I would like to give the person the benefit of the doubt most of the time.


Globalman, that is a pretty bad experience. I would be most upset that they took off without what appears to be any real plan for fixing the problem other than hoping it gets better in the air.

Either way it doesn't reflect well on the person quoted. Either they are really insensitive and class-conscious, or lack the judgment to realize that being quoted saying that means you'll be seen as insensitive and class-conscious.

True. When I took AC to Canada last time, the plane was so hot when it was on the ground that I felt as if I was boiling. However, the A/C was fine after took off. So you can't really say they knew the problem.

Thank you all for your opinions and understand, which I though was well thought out and reasonably balanced. ^

I don't hold anything against Christep really, after all this is all really loose conversation, and you are bound to get opinions and more opinions! Otherwise there wouldn't be much joy to whole thing. I�m sure there are times we�ll agree on things, and there are times we won�t!

B-HQC I appreciate your thoughts, here are a few of my thoughts that come to mind when I read through your reply.

Your point that you will run out of oxygen in the car I can see your point, but to deflate your point, imagine your heating is running to run at full blast throughout your 4 hours parked in the sun. Therefore you won't run out of air or heat. For arguments sake, lets just pretend this is a special car whose engine won't overheat from idling for so long.

Also I am certain you are a capable athlete or used to spending time in the Great Outdoors. That is commendable, and I think we should all be more like that! However there were babies, kids, elderly people, Pregnant women, and ill people on board. Some were succumbing to the heat, and I am fairly confident another 2 hours and someone would have fallen very ill.

And I know the point of driver doesn't sound wonderful, but that�s how the paper decided to quote us. This is something how the interview went:

Who were u traveling with?

Mrs. (HER NAME), Mr. (MY NAME) & Mr. (NAME OF OUR DRIVER ONLY). Then they asked, who is Mr. (NAME OF OUR DRIVER) to you? and she is like, oh he�s our driver. And so the article comes out, the newspaper chose to address him as Driver, what can we do? they had his full name. She even told them, Mr. (NAME OF OUR DRIVER) saw this and that. Even in our house we don't refer to the driver as Driver. He�s been with us for 17 years now, he�s like a member of our family. We were not allowed to read the article in advance either.

I use the term DRIVER liberally above not dehumanize the person, but just to make it easy for you to understand who I am writing about. I don't want to mention his real name unnecessarily.