> On Jul 27, 3:21 pm, BernieFlyer gmail.com> wrote:

>> RMK wrote:
>>

>>> "Pits" gmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:94b19464-d89d-4cc6-a0c4-4904d8265799@y22g2000prd.googlegroups.com...

>>>> one for the boffins and arm chair boffins on here
>>>> Would the damage potential have been greater/ the same/or less to
>>>> an aircraft in similar circumstances at a higher altitude ? To the
>>>> recent QF incident
>>>> for discussion

>>> The aircraft is pressurized to it's maximum pressure differential as it
>>> climbs (approx 8.9psi).
>>> So it's the same regardless of whether you are at 29000'or 45000'.
>>> The only 'danger' is that the higher you are, the longer it takes to get
>>> down to
>>> a safe level if you lose cabin pressure.

>> I hear what you say but if its unsafe to be above 10,000 without
>> additional oxygen then surely to keep the cabin sufficiently liveable
>> you would not want to have unsafe levels (ie 10,000ft) above that
>> height. Surely this means that the cabin must be under constantly
>> increasing pressure as you climb? Maybe I need to go to school again.
>>
>> You started something here Phil!!

>
> Gday Bernie
>
> well AA is good for renewing knolwdge base for us old fellahs eh .
>
> Do a some reading up think cabin pressure and max diff (hence my
> reference to cross flow valves ) Also OUTflow valves ( dont mix em
> up dinkum) as the tube climbes it should actually leak via the
> valves and maintain cabin altitude what ever it is set at the area
> oens I have seen look like a sort of vsi
>
> Grab a paper or plastic bag and keep blowing you will get what I am
> trying to say.
> Other folks on here are better able to explain and also (unlike me)
> currently qualified to do so .
>
> next red herring (but related in a fashion) Why does ones ears pop
> when altering (pressure dare we say altitude ) ? :-)
>
> There is a great docu from the old pathe library that the RAAF used
> to use as part of its instruction had comets brabazons tudors and
> Britania viscount BAC 111 tests I think a copy is in Hobart
> Achives
> and certainly at ARDU if you are really keen .
> Apart from a really easily understood flick just beautiful
> footage