ECAM vs OEB first - A-320

[Jimmy Hoffa Rocks]

You have a bleed fault in fault in flight.

Bleed abnormal. Do you go first to the OEB first then back to ECAM as per the oeb. In this case it seems seems. Logical to do OEB first.

Interesting as was trained to to do ECAM, OEB then Status.
Are we not breaking the sequence here ?

Now disarming spoilers after flaps up ?

Thanks for your input in advance. JHR

[PantLoad]

JHR,

Excellent question! And, 'back at you'...why don't you ask two questions of your training department:
1. Do you perform ECAM first, then OEB, etc., etc? (Your original question)
2. Will you please reference your answer to an authoritative document?

Now, to answer your question. (Disclaimer....I am retired and do not have access to the 'new format' FCOM. So, my page numbers will be different.)

Please refer to FCTM OP-040 P6/10.
Please refer to FCOM 3.07.10 P1/2.

In summary, you apply the OEB, NOT the ECAM. "The flight crew must disregard the ECAM procedure and/or STATUS of the ECAM alerts listed in the "AFFECTED ECAMs" flield and must apply the QRH's OEB procedure instead. If the operator uses the OEB REMINDER function and has activated the OEB REMINDER function onboard for the affected ECAM alerts, the ECAM informs the flight crew to refer to the OEB procedure in the QRH by displaying "REFER TO QRH PROC" and/or "FOR STS REFER TO QRH" line (Refer to the OEB reminder section for more information).

Actually, on the subsequent page of the FCOM, we are warned to cross check the OEB to any TRs that may exist in the Airplane Flight Manual, as the AFM and related TRs take priority over any other publication. (As is normal.)

So, your primary instruction was incorrect....Again, I strongly suggest you address your questions to your training department, as responses you received here in PPRune may my be incorrect, or may be correct for some operators....but, not yours....so, get the correct information vis-a-vis your company's SOP.

Then, when getting an answer, ask to see an authoritative document to support that answer.

Fly safe,

PantLoad

[Microburst2002]

that's right

If there is an ECAM and you think there is an OEB related to it, then inform the other pilot and ask for the QRH.

There is absolutely no point in doing the ECAM, which equates to an inadecuate procedure.

The "Status" "Stop ECAM" then check OEBs, then resets... is wrong. OEBs should be referred to instead of the ECAM.

[rudderrudderrat]

Hi MB2002,
The "Status" "Stop ECAM" then check OEBs, then resets... is wrong. It's not necessarily so. In typical AB fashion - why keep it simple when a more complicated procedure is available? A white OEB is simply an Airbus recommended improved procedure.

FCOM 3.7.10.
"Airbus strongly recommends that all Operators rapidly apply the OEB corrective actions as soon as they become available, particularly for red OEBs.

The information in the OEB is recommended by Airbus, by may not be approved by Airworthiness Authorities. However, the procedures of the red OEBs are also issued via Temporary Revisions (TRs) of the Airplane Flight Manual (AFM). If the procedures contained in the red OEB differ from the procedures in the AFM TR, the approved AFM TR remains the reference."

[Microburst2002]

I see your point

What I mean is that two different procedures cannot be carried out at the same event.
If you are going to consider the OEB then you have to do it disregarding the ECAM procedure. Otherwise, do the ECAM and ignore the OEB

But doing first the ECAM and only then remembering the OEB... Too late!

[rudderrudderrat]

Hi MB2002,
But doing first the ECAM and only then remembering the OEB... Too late!It's never too late to do the Review in your DODAR.
Once you had realised there was a better procedure in the OEBs having completing the ECAM, then there is nothing to stop you from actioning it.

In the example above, if you did the ECAM for the Eng Bleed Fault, then the OEB procedure would simply add:
Pack Flow Low, and Aft Cargo Hot Air Off.

[capt. solipsist]

the poster above said it: ask your training department for consistency of procedure.

if airbus meant the ECAM and OEB interchangeable, whatever for do they install OEB Reminder Functions?

[Microburst2002]

RRR

Yes, sometimes OEB procedures are complementary, but many times they are alternative. In this case you should do OEB instead of ECAM, In my opinion.

[rudderrudderrat]

I agree. But what would you do if you only realised there was an OEB after you had completed the ECAM?

[HPbleed]

That is why you check the OEB's during your pre-start checks and should be aware generally of what they are for your fleet.

[nitpicker330]

I've got a better idea, fly a Boeing!! None of this OEB crap.

Ahh how I remember the good old 777. :ok:

[PantLoad]

Flown both ... a lot....prefer the Bus. No kidding....

Fly safe,

PantLoad

[charlies angel]

If you get such a fault the ECAM tells you to "carry out the QRH procedure" as it is aware that there is a newer procedure on paper, that has not been formally Mod'ed into the aircraft software.
As the OEB is in the QRH you will be doing the logical Airboose order of:
S#@T!!!!....ecam...qrh...fcom...land :ok:

[CONF iture]

That is why you check the OEB's during your pre-start checks and should be aware generally of what they are for your fleet.
The fun thing is that OEBs seem to multiply lately ...

[Jimmy Hoffa Rocks]

Thanks for the replies.

The FCOM 3 07.10 states that if there is a difference between the AFM TR and Red OEB. The AFM TR wins, in the case of the bleed oeb is there a AFM TR for the bleed abnormal have not found the AFM TR. Is there a AFM TR for Bleed Abnormal ? The AFM I looked at did not have the Bleed OEB Dont have access to others at the moment.

If there is AFM TR then ?

Personally find the Airbus TR OEB system archaic.

Yes one does have to look up the OEB's before flight but having to remember a OEB, fair enough but is like a memory item, no ?

why hasnt the ECAM been updated to reflect this OEB ?

Found Boeing simpler

[PantLoad]

JHR,

The point of mentioning about the Airplane Flight Manual was not to cloud the issue of TRs....and their horsepower within the food chain....I mentioned it only to point out that anything in the AFM takes precedence.

Normally, in a real airline (most major carriers in the U.S. I categorize as 'real' airlines.), you will have management that takes care of such details...that is, determining and publishing and training to the correct standard. To put it another way, it should not be up to the cockpit crew to research an anomaly, in the cockpit, as it happens. Management should have done their homework before hand....disseminated the information (SOPs)....so that, when things go south, there is not doubt as to the course of action....the checking of this manual, the reference to that manual, etc., has already been done...in somebody's office...before hand.

I have not flown for anyone outside the U.S., but, judging on what I read here in PPrune, I gather that issues like these are the burden of the flight crews, not management as is with U.S. carriers. This is wrong. I can't image the FAA allowing such nonsense.

This is why, when I respond to PPrune queries, I usually ask why the company's training department hasn't been first consulted. The "what if's"
should be worked out and promulgated as SOP.

To put it another way, JHR, it is not your fault that you have this question. Your airline's management are responsible for having already answered such questions....if they're doing their jobs...(not spending their days on the golf course). :D

[Trust me Im Staff]

I've been trying to find the latest official Airbus OEB implementation procedure, can anyone provide the latest source document? In particular trying to validate our guidance that OEB process precedes and overrides any existing QRH procedure for the related failure / procedure.

much obliged..

TMIS

[groundfloor]

@ TMIS, The latest and relevant documentation will (should be) be in the aircraft. That's because some OEB s TRs are MSN (Manufacturer Serial Number) specific according to the aircrafts modification status. The easiest way to check is next time on the line dig out the AFM and check it. If its different to the rest of the aircraft docs/ actual aircraft mod standard then write it up.

[dream747]

Some aircraft have OEB reminders, which in effect directs you to the QRH procedure without any other ECAM actions to be applied. No idea why they don't incorporate the procedures into the ECAM too.

[phantoms7]

Hi there!
Let's continue with this subject..
For example, let's assume that you have an AIR L(R) WING LEAK, should you stop ECAM and refer to OEB AIR ENG 1(2) FAULT reaching STATUS, cause you have ENG BLEED in inoperative systems?
My own opinion is that you shouldn't, but our chefs have opposite meaning...

[Natstrackalpha]

Can`t you just prioritise, deal in priority, and fly the aircraft?

Just get rid of all the faults taking into consideration all the secondary faults thus created - get rid of them by dealing with them and then Status to tell you the obvious yet copious list of the things you have not got then fly the aeroplane, whats left of it.

Why don`t they make the read out of the Status to be preceded by the word "No"

"No Autobrake"
"No Nosewheel Steering"
"No this"
"No that"
"Flaps/Slats slow" etc

It kind of puts it all in context.

[vilas]

Hi evrybody
In the third column of List of OEBs under heading E you will see letter Y or N. If it is Y that means it affects ECAM. Only in case of such OEBs when PF asks for ECAM actions That OEB needs to be applied first. In case of N you do ECAM as usual but there is an entry point for this OEB to apply which is required to be noted in your OEB review in cockpit prep. This was introduced a few years ago to attempt and prevent flight turn back. For instance the Bleed OEB if not applied before ECAM will lead to loss cabin pressure and descent, applying it now won't save situation but applying first may recover the bleed. Aircrafs fitted with OEB option ECAM itself directs you to the OEB.I know Airbus haters will have a field day but OEBs are temporary phenomina.

[phantoms7]

Natstrackalpha,
and your variant is.... that I have to guess myself, right?:)