[WalterBright]

> it seems weird that glass fragments would be projected inward in that scenario

At speed, I don't know what the outside pressure on the windshield would be, but I'd be surprised if it was lower than the cabin air pressure.

After all, it is called a wind "shield".

[icegreentea2]

Plugging in 35k ft altitude, and 775 ft/s velocity here (https://www.spaceworks.aero/fcc2/index.html) gives dynamic pressure of 220 lb/ft2, vs ~2100 lb/ft2 for 1atm at sea level (the same calculator says 7k ft altitude has a static pressure of ~1600 lb/ft2, or rough idea of cabin air pressure).

[WalterBright]

The static pressure at 30,000 feet would have to be added in, around 550 lb/ft2, so it looks like the pressure inside is greater than outside.

[the_arun]

At that height if windows are damaged enough to hurt captain or pilot, would the flight lose balance because of air coming in? How did they land in that situation? There is no mention of that in the article.

[Reason077]

The laminated glass did not fully break. It appears only the inner layer shattered, and cabin pressure was not lost.

It has happened before that cockpit windows have failed at altitude resulting in explosive decompression, and the plane still landed successfully. For example, British Airways Flight 5390:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Airways_Flight_5390

[o11c]

Hm, has something been done about the "cannot hear the radio" problem since then?

[WalterBright]

The airplane shouldn't be affected much by a blown out window. However, the blast in the captain's face might make it very difficult for him to see or even breath. If he could get his oxygen mask on, which I think has goggles, he should be ok.

[ctippett]

The article mentions there was no depressurisation, meaning the was no breach of the fuselage/windshield.