> This is to be fairly comprehensive by the ATSB.
>
> Qantas Boeing 747-400 depressurisation and diversion to Manila on 25
> July 2008
>
> http://www.atsb.gov.au/newsroom/2008/release/2008_24.aspx
>
> Also this is not a bad passenger account of things.
>
> http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/general_aviation/read.main/4...

>
> This is to be fairly comprehensive by the ATSB.
>
>
> Qantas Boeing 747-400 depressurisation and diversion to Manila on 25
> July 2008
>
> http://www.atsb.gov.au/newsroom/2008/release/2008_24.aspx
>
>
>
>
> Also this is not a bad passenger account of things.
>
> http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/general_aviation/read.main/4082678/
>

>Rob. wrote:

>>
>> This is to be fairly comprehensive by the ATSB.
>>
>>
>> Qantas Boeing 747-400 depressurisation and diversion to Manila on 25
>> July 2008
>>
>> http://www.atsb.gov.au/newsroom/2008/release/2008_24...

> On Wed, 30 Jul 2008 10:16:23 +1000, BernieFlyer
>
>
>
> gmail.com> wrote:

>>Rob. wrote:

>

>>> This is to be fairly comprehensive by the ATSB.

>

>>> Qantas Boeing 747-400 depressurisation and diversion to Manila on 25
>>> July 2008

>

>>>http://www.atsb.gov.au/newsroom/2008/release/2008_24.aspx

>

>>> Also this is not a bad passenger account of things.

>

>>>http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/general_aviation/read.main/4...

>

>>One difference between the passenger and ATSB is that the passenger said ...

> One difference between the passenger and ATSB is that the passenger said
> that the engines were closed down at the end of the runway and the
> aircraft towed with no Air Conditioning in the cabin to the tarmac. ATSB
> say it taxied in normally under its own power. I find it interesting
> that ATSB would get this wrong (presumably!!) as the passenger seemed
> pretty switched on and had 30 hours flying time so should understand
> this basic stuff. Its a minor point but if they got this wrong well......