Revealed on the link below, that in May 2011 a Ryanair B738, whilst taxying for departure 25L at Barcelona had a ground collision with a stationary aircraft. The crew of the other aircraft were unaware there was a collision, and both aircraft flew to destination without being examined.

Incident: Ryanair B738 and American B763 at Barcelona on May 27th 2011, both aircraft departed despite ground collision and passenger complaints (http://www.avherald.com/h?article=45363621&opt=0)

Preliminary CIAIAC report (in Spanish only) here:

14-04-2011. EI-EKB. Boeing 737-8AS. Aeropuerto de Barcelona - 2011 - Investigación - CIAIAC - Órganos Colegiados - Ministerio de Fomento (http://www.fomento.gob.es/MFOM/LANG_CASTELLANO/ORGANOS_COLEGIADOS/CIAIAC/INVESTIGACION/2011/011_2011.htm)

This is being discussed on avherald:

Accident: Ryanair B738 and American B763 at Barcelona on Apr 14th 2011, both aircraft departed despite ground collision and passenger complaints (http://avherald.com/h?comment=45363621&opt=0)



An American Airlines
Boeing 767-300, registration N366AA performing flight AA-67 from Barcelona,SP
(Spain) to New York JFK,NY (USA), had taxied to the holding point runway 25L and
was holding short of the runway.

A Ryanair Boeing 737-800, registration EI-EKB performing
flight FR-8136 from Barcelona,SP (Spain) to Ibiza,SP (Spain) with 169 passengers
and 6 crew, was taxiing along Barcelona's taxiway K for departure from runway
25L and was maneouvering to pass behind the Boeing 767-300.

A number of passengers on board of the Boeing 737-800
observed the right hand wing of the aircraft contact the tailplane of the Boeing
767-300 and rose out of their seats attracting the attention of a flight
attendant. A passenger told the flight attendant, that their aircraft had hit
the aircraft besides them. The flight attendant contacted the purser, who
instructed her to contact the flight deck, she contacted the flight deck and
informed the captain that passengers had seen their aircraft had hit another
aircraft. The captain responded however everything was fine and she continued with the takeoff about 2 minutes after the Boeing 767.

A pretty damning report if it all turns out to be exactly as written.

It's true. They are using this incident as a case study on Cabin Crew training courses.

1. How does Ryanair manage to 'cover up' all their incidents in that the media never appears to get hold of them. And yes htere si a long list.

2. I am lost for words that an airline captain should take off knowing there had been a coming together.Engineering inspection being a must surely?

If I did that my company would fire me..... No questions asked

2. I am lost for words that an airline captain should take off knowing there had been a coming together.Engineering inspection being a must surely?

Not just one but both captains took off, is it feasible that the crew of the 767 didn't notice it?

The most damning aspect of it is that (AFAIK) the "Captain" :yuk: is still employed, albeit in the other seat

I am further told that the crew of the 767 were unaware, and were not (of course, as it was all "OK" ) made aware by the FR crew, of the "possible" :hmm: collision. Given the "sue them for all they are worth" mentality on the West side of the pond, I would have thought some enterprising Lawyer could cobble up an excellent case for sueing the hell out of either Ms Capt &/or Ryanair.
Never mind the risk to ones own aircraft, what a :mad: liberty to decide "sod it the other guy has to take the same chance I am taking" . Sorry, but that is criminal negligence, + endangering another aircraft, pure & simple.

Out of interest from a helicopter pilot, what would any fixed wing crew members who were flying as passengers have done on witnessing the same or similar events on board a commercial airliner ?

If you were absolutely certain of what you had seen, would you take steps to make the aircraft return to the gate after the captain had decided otherwise.

If they ignored my objections ? Walk to the front & open the exit thereby blowing the slide if I was 101% sure. . . .and no, not joking.

Really surprised the Eng didn't take it further, they are not normally "shy retiring" types :D

As mentioned before, they not only knowingly departed without engineering inspection, they also failed to notify the AA 767 or ATC and let it depart too. What if the 767 had elevator damage? Disgraceful in all aspects if true.

Hey C P S, I was told they demoted her so she left. I am defo with you on not just sitting there while they get airborne after that.

Hey Captainplaystation. Don't forget your action of blowing the slide might get you banned from ever flying Ryanair again! That would be a real shame ;-)

I agree with all that's been said, no excuses for the fr captain. If that had happened in a car for example and the offender had left the scene of the accident without swapping addresses, then that's a criminal offence??

If it's true - then what is the point of the FO on that flight if they just sat there and potentially allowed the captain to make such a :mad: decision

It does make you wonder, and I often do, what the reaction of cabin crew would actually be in an instance like this. It will be interesting to find out, as we surely will eventually, what conversations actually took place.
I know for certain that if I was sure something was wrong then I would be up out of my seat, and, not get back in it again until something was done.
If the photos are correct the crew of the RYR must have surely have been able to see the damage to the AA. If they did and did nothing about it I find that incredible.

So why isn't Spain making a bit more fuss about this, bearing in mind that AENA have now bowed to MOR's wishes with regard to the agreement at Alicante (El Altet) that Ryanair passengers may now walk to and from the aircraft? Could the answer be that Spain is desperate for tourist revenue?

SunnyJohn, Aena s debt creditors are Irish. Why do you think RYRY gets away with so much??

The 767 had substantial damage to the elevator section, see the link further up the page for pics.

This should see Ryanair and the Cpt, who failed to notify both ATC and the 767 crew of the damage, up on criminal negligence charges.

How would Ryanair have reacted had the 767 elevators failed to perform upon take off. An absolutely shambolic situation.

It will be interesting to find out, as we surely will eventually, what conversations actually took place.

According to the official report:

"The FA seems to have been unaware of the safety implications of the information she was providing. First, she rang only once, instead of the three times that, as stated by the flight crew, are procedurally required if a condition poses a threat to safety. As the captain noted, this predisposed her to not place too much importance on the report. Secondly, the FA began her report with "I'm sorry to bother you, I know I'm not supposed to ...", as she stated, or with "For your information only", according to the captain's statement. In any event, either expression indicates hesitation regarding whether or not she should have interrupted the pilots' activities with this report.

Another indication of the poor communication is the fact that when recounting her conversation with the captain, the FA described the captain's explanation as involving "aviation terminology", which suggests that the FA was not familiar with the language used by the pilot.

The fact that the captain believed only one passenger, and not several, had reported the collision is further proof of this miscommunication and proved critical to her assessment of the situation, as she herself stated."

Oh the biscuit chuckers are to blame, coz they didn't do the correct procedure and didn't explain it properly. I love a happy ending.

I wonder if anyone was looking back out the right cockpit window to see there was clearance as it clattered the 767?

I wonder what speed they were taxying at, and were they in a hurry?

I wonder why nobody noticed the trashed winglet at Ibiza?

I wonder if the 767 had crashed into the middle of the Atlantic killing all on board, and they parked the 738 at Barcelona overnight, they might have got away with it, the ramp bunnies could have carried the can for the winglet, smacked it with a truck they did, honest guv?

:ugh:

link to the B767 damage

http://i45.tinypic.com/a26xeb.jpg

According to the official report:


Is this a public document (and if so, is there a link?) or are you referring to a company-internal report?

is it feasible that the crew of the 767 didn't notice it?

Yes, feasible depending on the severity of impact. I remember an incident in MAN about 7 years ago with a similar mismatch in size, the crew of the larger aircraft (the moving one in this case) felt an shudder but it was not immediately obvious that there had been a collision. The stationary aircraft in that case were immediately aware of the impact.

Link for AAIB Report. (http://www.aaib.gov.uk/cms_resources.cfm?file=/Boeing%20767-204,%20G-SATR%20and%20Boeing%20737-37Q,%20G-ODSK.pdf)

sr

Is this a public document (and if so, is there a link?) or are you referring to a company-internal report?

http://www.fomento.gob.es/NR/rdonlyres/9BC12631-9382-4E21-8B5E-C912A63FB4CA/112497/02_2012.pdf

English translation P211 onwards.

The AA 767 had an elavator sliced nearly in half by the winglet on the FR. The FR crew, if aware, should have charges brought against them.

SunnyJohn, Aena s debt creditors are Irish. Why do you think RYRY gets away with so much??dlcmdrx - thanks, I didn't know that. Makes sense!

Very interesting report.

Three aircraft (AA, FR, AF) cleared to the holding point, without further specification. AA is first in line, and is cleared to G3. FR comes up behind, turns a touch, trying to squeeze around, probably hits the elevator (the report explicitly states that the collision could not be detected on the acceleration data from either aircraft), and (when the F/O tells her to stop) stops.
Several passengers on the right side of the aircraft start speaking excitedly in Spanish. One tells the FA in English that there has been a collision. The FA goes to the Purser and asks what to do.

Meanwhile, the Captain looks out the F/O's window to verify visually separation. ATC asks them to proceed to spot G1. The reply (no mention of whether F/O or Capt.), as transcribed: "Can we just stand by if you like in the aisle before to (garbled) start clearance... to after"
The FA calls the Captain with a "Only for your information..."; the Captain gives the FA a response that it not understood.

ATC calls again, asking them to move to G1, so that AF behind them can go to G2. They reply: "Could I wait and move forward if it fits... to make sure clearance"

Thirty seconds later, AF calls and asks ATC to "Confirm that they are moving forward so that we can pass behind."
AA, hearing this, moves 10-15 feet closer to the holding point.

From the Ryanair crew's statement:
After receiving clearance, they took off normally to their destination (Ibiza). There were no additional comments from the from any cabin crew members for the duration of the flight.
Though they stated being certain that there had been no contact, the captain decided to do the pre-flight walk around personally once they were parked at the Ibiza airport. During the inspection she noticed that the paint on the right winglet was scratched. She regarded the defect as minor, one that did not justify any actions by maintenance personnel, especially as they would have had to fly from Barcelona, since the airline does not have mechanics in Ibiza. She also did not make an entry of the defect in the aircraft logbook.

During the stopover at the Ibiza airport, there were no additional comments from the cabin crew regarding the passengers' reports of potential contact.

After the return flight to Barcelona, as they were leaving the airplane, a cabin crew member informed the captain that several passengers had reported possible contact, which raised some concern during the flight to Ibiza. The captain was surprised to hear this since the FA who had called the cockpit, and who was very close to the cockpit, did not make any comments about it upon arriving in Ibiza. It was then that the captain called maintenance services who, after assessing the damage, opened a deferred maintenance item and dispatched the airplane.

Winglet "scratched" and it did that amount of damage?

Must have been those mischievous leprechauns.

:)

The captain , being a contractor, is of course personally financially responsible for the damage.

Look forward to the tales of extradition and the american court system!

At least they would be able to blow the hooter for an on time arrival in Ibiza.

Does anything else matter to the Dublin "management" ?

There are NO contractor airline pilots flying scheduled ops. Within Ryanair or any other European airline.
All are employees according to the law, no matter what contract said pilots were obliged to sign. If they signed a " contractor" contract, the employER is guilty of false self employment and is liable to pay due social security and taxes .

Icelanta - we're talking semantics here...

A large number of pilots working for FR and EZY are SELF-EMPLOYED.

For practical purposes the are contractors as they are not paid directly by the airline they work for.

Icelanta,

true or not, completely off topic, and the subject has been bloodmilked in countless threads here on pprune.

Regarding the incident, it´s old news. I find it unfair to bring up something that happened what, 2 years ago, and say that Ryanair are always trying to cover up every incident they have, like any airline would advertise that they had a mishap. My point is basically, that people here on pprune are not very consistent when it comes to throwing stones. Ryanair hate-ing makes people pick anything they can just to get a shot at Ryanair.
I´ve said this before, I´m no fan of RYR management, I think they´re fkrs and bullies and play a big part in making t&c´s for pilots in they state that they are now. Having said that, I think flying wise, they are as good as it gets, and I believe statistically has no worse incident record than other airlines - quite possibly better. Maintainance has so far been one of the best in the airline industry, sop´s are a great safety net (although some trainers are comepletely fixed on them, at the expense of airmanship), and the pilots are generally in good form due to amount of sectors, demanding airports etc.

Oh yes, the incident... I think the captain actually thought that nothing happened, the collision might have been taken as a bump in the taxiway.
The reaction; absolutely ridiculous! If there´s any doubt, there´s no doubt. If you have to ask the other a/c to move forward, and then having cabin crew saying that pax thought there was a collision...

What's the problem guys? These ham-fisters beat on Boeings constantly. They are tough airplanes!

PLONK (http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=ryanair+hard+landing)

-drl

Unlike BA for example

ba hard landing - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=ba+hard+landing&oq=ba+hard+landing&gs_l=youtube.3...22113.22535.0.23983.2.2.0.0.0.0.116.227.0j2.2.0...0.0...1ac.kSyAC2eQZqU)

And you can look up other airline you wish

From the crew statement:

She regarded the defect as minor, one that did not justify any actions by maintenance personnel, especially as they would have had to fly from Barcelona, since the airline does not have mechanics in Ibiza.

I've noticed this law of nature operating in various companies/individuals over the years. Now I've a name for it - the Law of Ibiza!

The seriousness with which defects are treated is inversely proportional to the distance of qualified repair staff.

Another similar conflict at LHR here:

Air Accidents Investigation: Airbus 501130 (http://www.aaib.gov.uk/sites/aaib/publications/bulletins/july_1996/airbus_501130.cfm)

I was pax on the 757 and definitely felt it. What the report doesn't say was that we were deplaned on to coaches without any break in departures on the nearby runway. Don't think the yellow jacket brigade would allow that today!

The AA 767 had an elavator sliced nearly in half by the winglet on the FR. ...
You should google the difference between elevator and stabilizer... :ugh:

Very familiar with both thanks. Maybe you need a bit more OJT on flight control identification.:ok:

That is what a corporate culture of fear and intimidation gets you. Is anyone surprised? No. Does the Irish regulator care? It seems not

Not sure of the protocol here, but would the Irish Aviation people not be involved in the incident investigation? If so, any idea of whether or when they would report, or would they report separately? Assuming the 737 was EI registered?

If the reports of the Prestwick stuff I saw elsewhere about the Captain are true surely the IAA should have an opinion, but she isn't Irish licensed I presume.

Whats the date on the pic of the damage to the Stab?

Is that a trick question ? :)

http://i45.tinypic.com/a26xeb.jpg

The datestamp on the photo (which is the same one as in the CIAIAC report) is 14th April 2011 (the date of the incident). The photo is clearly taken on the gate at JFK (STA would have been around 1245 local).

As you rightly say, the damage shown is to the horizontal stabiliser, and not the elevator.

Assuming the 737 was EI registered?

14-04-2011. EI-EKB. Boeing 737-8AS. Aeropuerto de Barcelona - 2011 - Investigación - CIAIAC - Órganos Colegiados - Ministerio de Fomento

---Quote (Originally by DaveReidUK)--- As you rightly say, the damage shown is to the horizontal stabiliser, and not the elevator. ---End Quote---



Really? Must be the extra special one-off 767 Boeing built with the elevator attached to the leading edge of the stabiliser that got hit. It seems there is more than a few who need OJT.

Say again?

Why is it when it comes to aircraft safety that we are always wise after the event?
When you are a passenger on an airliner, you are in effect one of many eyes and ears which crews (both cabin and flightdeck) should make good use of when it comes to monitoring the aircraft.

Quite often, passenger comments are dismissed due to the attitude that they don't know what they are talking about.

In the Ryanair incident, when one of the passengers who observed the collision identified himself as an engineer, the immediate action would have been to at least allow him to talk to the Captain in person. The aircraft should have either returned to stand or remained at the hold while a discussion took place.

Everybody on board an aircraft has equal rights when it comes to self preservation. A Captain has no right what so ever to put any passengers life in danger unnecessarily.
There is no defence of these actions what so ever.
Hiding behind the operational pressure excuse is getting a little tiresome.
A commander of an aeroplane is just that. Once he takes command of a flight then all the responsibilites pertaining to that flight are his. If fearing for his/her job is the top of his priorities then he or she shouldn't be sat there in the first place.
If there is a problem with Company Culture then the hundreds/thousands of crews employed should make a stance to the IAA before the day comes when there is an accident. Then we can all play at wise after the event again.
Coop

Agreed Coopervane.

Just a few weeks ago, I was sitting aboard one of FRs competitors (as SLF) when we had taxied just short of the holding point. After aileron and spoiler checks were done (twice on the Airbus) I noted no flap or slat deployment.

I immediately undid my belt and went to the back of the aircraft as it was the nearest to me and told one of the cabin crew. He immediately told me to get back to my seat and I said no, not until he called the flight deck to let them know of my concern. He duly made the call and indeed, half way through the call - control surfaces were deployed.

After the flight, I was called to the flight deck to chat with the flightdeck crew. They had selected flaps after engine 1 start but they had not deployed until much later- something I had not seen before. The crew duly thanked me and said they would inform maintenance immediately.

I didn't fancy a short flight on a full A320 ISA+15 with no flaps/slats selected for take off!!

They had selected flaps after engine 1 start but they had not deployed until much later- - I smell finest hogwash:) I have never heard of flaps selected before engine start is complete, and if they 'failed to deploy' the a/c is not safe to fly.:ugh:.

I know a pilot that works for Ryanair. The captain of the aircraft that hit the 767 was a female... A few weeks after that incident the same captain overshot the runway at Manchester... She is now a First Officer... Very wreckless:=

BOAC Call it what you will my friend. Did I say they selected flaps before engine 1 start or did I imply they should have done this? Perhaps I should have put .....selected flaps after engine 1 start AS NORMAL?

The fact that the crew did not know they had not deployed immediately after selection was why they called maintenance afterwards!

Is there something I'm not making clear? Or you trying to gain brownie points? :mad:

I smell finest hogwashhttp://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/smile.gif I have never heard of flaps selected before engine start is complete, and if they 'failed to deploy' the a/c is not safe to fly.


Actually I had a similar experience some years ago, on a TWA DC-9. I happened to be sitting where I could see both ailerons. We were in the last stages of taxi. One aileron was full up, the other full down. This did not look at all right to me. I flagged down the attendant as she made her way to the back crew seat and pointed this out. She fairly sprinted to the cabin and sure enough, we pulled out of line near the threshold. I saw the control surfaces move and the flaps deploy and stow a couple of times. A crew member came into the passenger cabin and took a quick look. The captain apologized for the delay and put it down to instrumentation problems. After 10 minutes or so we were underway. No harm in using the meatware this way :)

-drl

Try not to be so sensitive. The 'hogwash' was for the crew.

By the way, you said
"They had selected flaps after engine 1 start" which is NOT normal procedure. I said "before engine start is complete" and as you no doubt know there are two engines on a 737.

"The fact that the crew did not know they had not deployed immediately after selection was why they called maintenance afterwards!" They should have returned to stand. If flaps do not deploy normally the aircraft is u/s for flight.

So, "my friend" - in my opinion you were given a bucket of hogwash. Simples. The only conclusion I can draw from YOUR story is that they either forgot or delayed it for some reason.

Originally Posted by KBPsen

---Quote (Originally by DaveReidUK)--- As you rightly say, the damage shown is to the horizontal stabiliser, and not the elevator. ---End Quote---

Really? Must be the extra special one-off 767 Boeing built with the elevator attached to the leading edge of the stabiliser that got hit. It seems there is more than a few who need OJT.

Well if the cap fits ...

I've coloured it in to make it easier for you. :O

http://www.boeing.com/commercial/airports/acaps/767sec2.pdf

http://www.civilaircraftregisters.org/Mode_S_Resources/B767%20horizontal%20stab.jpg

KEY:

Red bit - moves up and down a lot
Yellow bit - moves up and down, but not so much, and occasionally gets hit by passing aircraft

LGW Vulture:

I'm afraid the story you were told by the crew of your Airbus is almost certainly a load of BS. The flap / slat system on the A320 is self monitoring and takes only a few seconds to tell the crew if the flaps do not move to match the pilot's selection. If they actually did experience a failure of the flaps to move, combined with a failure to give the appropriate warning, then your flight should never have left the ground as the function of that system was (or at least should have been) in serious question.

I suspect that what really happened is that the flaps weren't set during the after start flow. That in itself is not a huge issue, as the before takeoff checklist includes a check of the required and actual flap settings. Also, there is a takeoff configuration test that is done just prior to entering the runway. If the flaps were retracted, that check would have resulted in an alert message in the flight deck.

Actually I had a similar experience some years ago, on a TWA DC-9. I happened to be sitting where I could see both ailerons. We were in the last stages of taxi. One aileron was full up, the other full down. This did not look at all right to me. I flagged down the attendant as she made her way to the back crew seat and pointed this out. She fairly sprinted to the cabin and sure enough, we pulled out of line near the threshold. I saw the control surfaces move and the flaps deploy and stow a couple of times. A crew member came into the passenger cabin and took a quick look. The captain apologized for the delay and put it down to instrumentation problems. After 10 minutes or so we were underway. No harm in using the meatware this way

Ailerons on DC 9 and MD 80 are aerodynamically controlled by tabs, so the ailerons may stay in any position during ground ops. Same with the elevators. What you saw was perfectly normal.

ManaAda System, you beat me to it, many times in my 18mth on the Diesel9 we had a helpful following aircraft alerting us to control surfaces all over the place.

I also had to endure 1 year on the Fokker100 being told we had no flaps selected for take-off, that was a normal config on that beast.

Fully agree about intervening when sitting as SLF, no flaps/no de-icing (think Aeroflot) / collisions/whatever. . . .you will be involved in the smouldering wreck & any crew worth their salt will listen to your concerns , particularly (but not limited to) if you have some aviation qualification.

Amazed the Eng on the FR flight didn't take it further.

Well if the cap fits ...

I've coloured it in to make it easier for you.


Haha. Between the lines as well. Made me chuckle!

BOAC. Engine start order on a two engine aircraft. first you start engine 2, then you start engine 1.

The captain was under the impression that only one passenger had witnessed the contact, and not several, as she later discovered. She said that her decision to continue with the flight would probably have been different if she had known that several passengers had reported contact.

Probably??

Taxied a half metre to one side of centreline to give clearance

Anyone who taxis so close to another aircraft that they feel it necessary to deviate a half meter off the c/l clearly has serious issues with judgement. Firstly an inability to assess the accuracy of their own judgement because no one can accurately judge a half metre gap at their wingtip. Secondly a fundamental flaw in judgement itself, no sane pilot makes a run for a gap so narrow that they think a mere half metre will get them by.

Pax report contact with another a/c.

Almost beyond belief anyone would dismiss this without investigation before taking off, especially when the FO had told you to stop suddenly due proximity to that a/c. Grossly and unforgivably unprofessional and downright DANGEROUS.

Saw scrapes in the paint knowing there had been reports of contact but ignored them, and considered the fact they were not at a maintenance base relevant to that decision.

Criminally irresponsible. A loss of licence decision imho.

but would the Irish Aviation people not be involved in the incident investigation?

Well, maybe, but if you think they'd do anything about it I'll assume you nothing about the IAA. A call to an ex Air Corps mate in Ryanair perhaps, "Oh, just a wee scrape? No harm done? Oh, OK, that's all then...":ugh:

"Can we just stand by if you like in the aisle before to (garbled) start clearance... to after"

Clearly talking utter scribble as well as thinking it. What the £@<hidden>%& is that supposed to mean to a BCN controller????


Having said all that it can be very difficult to get cabin crew to take one seriously as a passenger reporting defects. We all assume pax to be utter numpties and it is easier to dismiss them as imagining things than to act upon it. Several years ago I was pax on a F27 into Norwich - or was it Teesside? and clearly saw the wheels trample two taxiway edge lights (The sort on nine inch stalks) but the FA at the door tried to fob me off with a bored yes yes yes thank you sir even when I identified myself as a commercial pilot. She only acted, with obvious annoyance, when I said I'd report it forthwith to the airport authorities and demand an inspection of the taxiway light to prove it before they left.
You may have to be very firm in such a situation and I agree with Capt Playstation that in a similar event to the Ryanair incident the last resort is to blow a slide to prevent a potential catastrophe.

when the FO had told you to stop suddenly due proximity to that a/c.

Which throws up a question that lurks in my head since I read this story...what did the FO do? What did he say to his captain?
CRM? Was he in the loop? Or wasn`t he informed at all?

Ballsout - I was giving a little allowance for possible non-English speaker (most people would have written 'after start') and the other thing is, of course, not always:)

One night taxying in at Baku I wasn't happy with wingtip clearance.
ATC was getting stroppy, the 'Follow Me' was driving in circles in front of us (no kidding) and our station manager whom I'd permitted to sit on the flight deck (never again) was loudly telling me that there was plenty of room.
Of course only one opinion counted and we moved slowly forward when I decided that it was OK to proceed.

Once had locals jumping up and down and shouting over a cargo door problem in Spain. Again, we went when engineering control and I had both agreed that it was safe to do so.

Never be pressurised into taking an avoidable chance.

The old art of opening the window to check seems to have gone, eh, out the window.

The old art of opening the window to check seems to have gone, eh, out the window

True - also in the "olden days" we might have sent the Flight Engineer to go and have a look from a pax window or (on the B707) drop down through the "lower 41" to even take a closer look.

Was the skipper involved the same skipper involved in the Prestwick incident some years ago?

@<hidden> - not always No 2 first....

The approved procedure for single engine taxi on the narrow body Airbus is to start ENG1 first. If you are then going to taxi on one engine the electric pump is switched on to pressurise the yellow system and the flaps are deployed. If you decide not to taxi on one engine (slot cnx etc) then you start No2, after starts and off you go.

On another note, I'd love to a picture of the underside of the 767's stabiliser!

First, as Mr. Reid has already pointed out (and as I've pillaged from), you can consult the official report (03AHJ_VuvoeHwrkEPNT6YPAbtLsNbNVmSET_okBVpA5mB0IHaKj2PxtaLLbTI_QwrEbQgiD74yqZiGmmhsYeQWRHivSEr3MJBJBP1T0uPnGJhaVMPNSijbnUiubAIggwM3Ew_RgDVddOmW) for pictures of the damage.

According to the report (http://www.skybrary.aero/bookshelf/books/1390.pdf), the Captain of the Prestwick overrun on December 23, 2009, was 33 years old and had 5,557 hours (1,832 on type). The Barcelona report gives both Captain and F/O hours, apparently rounding off to the nearest 5. The Captain there (15 and 2/3 months later) was 34 years old and had 6500 hours (2215 on type). The F/O had 750 hours (500 on type).

Just a few weeks ago, I was sitting aboard one of FRs competitors (as SLF) when we had taxied just short of the holding point. After aileron and spoiler checks were done (twice on the Airbus) I noted no flap or slat deployment.

So, that'll be easyJet then.

By the way, you said
"They had selected flaps after engine 1 start" which is NOT normal procedure.

Yes, it is at easyJet, if you are doing OETD (which is SOP).

BOAC. Engine start order on a two engine aircraft. first you start engine 2, then you start engine 1.

At easyJet it is now 1 then 2.

The OETD goes roughly like this:


Start 1.
Set the flaps.
Taxi around the airport.
Start 2 while taxiing.
Do the after start checks (while taxiing).


So, they probably forgot to set the flaps (easily done, given that for years we have all been setting flaps after second engine start) and had not yet got to doing the checks (sometimes delayed until you are stopped, so you are not both eyes down while driving).

Some of us have concerns about OETD, because it changes the order of everything (causing errors like, er, forgetting the flaps) and because it has both of you doing lots of checks when driving (causing wingtip crunching errors, or worse).

Yes, but to deliver equus sh*te about "They had selected flaps after engine 1 start but they had not deployed until much later" to the enquiring and alert pax.....................:ugh:

Is it possible in OETD to fail to select the appropriate hyd system for flaps?

Indeed.

And no, no selection needed.

Shocking behaviour from the flight crew. It was criminally neglectful to ignore those warning signs and proceed with a departure after the cabin report.

But that, I'm afraid, is the outcome of a terribly irresponsible operational policy by FR's management. Time pressure, steep cockpit gradients etc etc. Lady luck beamed one heck of a smile at the crews and pax of these two aircraft.

One day she will be looking the other day when it comes to FR. Sadly. But the bean-counters and jeans wearing managers at FR are ignoring the warning signs in their indefatigable search for the €.

Is it possible in OETD to fail to select the appropriate hyd system for flaps?

Well yes and no! The Green system will provide "slow" flap but the PTU will run after park brake release (mod dependant) and give yellow Hyd and normal flap speed (if Yellow elec pump accidentally not selected).

Edited colour correction :O

Please don't get it into the heads of the spotters that frequent these forums that it's okay to blow the slides with the engines running. If the masters aren't cut in time and they choose the "wrong" doors then it's game over.

Please don't get it into the heads of the spotters that frequent these forums that it's okay to blow the slides with the engines running. If the masters aren't cut in time and they choose the "wrong" doors then it's game over.

I don't think the poster who proposed this scenario was suggesting doing so with a view to initiating an evacuation.

But, given an aircraft that has become potentially unairworthy and a crew who don't appear to give a toss, you can't deny that blowing the slide would be a pretty good way of getting their attention and making sure the aircraft wasn't going anywhere.

What would you have done instead ?

Typical woman driver.

As a passenger, I mean. Like the Spanish passengers on the 738. Note that much is made of one of them being an engineer. Wow, says a lot for the airline view of the traveling public. Popping a slide as Agaricus bisporus suggests would seem a bit over the top for a non-pilot so, what do you do? Stand up in the aisle and refuse to sit down, knowing you'll probably look ridiculous or hysteric at some stage? Or sit back and cross your fingers.

That's what I did - sit back and hope for the best - somewhere back in the 1980s on a VASP 732 when I realised we were taking off with zero flaps. Rio to Sao Paulo, a connecting flight for Lufthansa. Then, there was just no time: a very fast taxi and zoom off we went and quite a rattling experience it was. I wonder what I would do today in similar circumstances.

But in this thread's particular case what seems almost criminally negligent is not that the 738 departed, but that its crew did not contact the AA flight directly to say "look, we passed very close to you and there may have been contact". If in doubt, etc.

Red bit - moves up and down a lot
Yellow bit - moves up and down, but not so much, and occasionally gets hit by passing aircraft
So, you are suggesting that the yellow bit is the bit damaged in the photo?? :confused:

Really?? :confused:

Too bad someone was not paying attention on NWA 255. By a strange coincidence, my little adventure happened in the same place, DET. As I was debating with myself over pointing out to the attendant what could have been a problem, I had that in mind.

And to the person who said it was normal to have full opposite deflection of the ailerons - well that may be. But I've been on a large number of DC-9 flights and never saw that before. And they did pull out of line. Whatever, it did no harm to just calmly point and speak out. Maybe it did some good.

So, you are suggesting that the yellow bit is the bit damaged in the photo??

The original picture must have been taken with a very wide angle lens. Perhaps this picture makes it clearer:

Aircraft N592HA (2003 Boeing 767-3CB C/N 33468) Photo by Francisco Undiks (Photo ID: AC116797) (http://www.airport-data.com/aircraft/photo/116797L.html)

Golf Charlie 737 mentioned
Very wreckless

Wreckless is good, reckless not so good:-)

My apologies...What is an OETD start-up...OETD stands for?

I google it without sucess, my bad.

OETD means one engine taxy departure. we are permitted to start no 1 engine, start taxying to the runway and then start the other engine (no 2) before take off. there has to be a 2 minute warm up period from when the 2nd engine is stable before take off power is applied.

Stand up in the aisle and refuse to sit down, knowing you'll probably look ridiculous or hysteric at some stage?

Who cares about looking ridiculous when instead you might end up looking terminally dead? Blowing the slides is IMHO over the top and might get you charged with reckless endangerment and property damage regardless of whether your concerns were justified or not. Making a scene and refusing to sit down will get you the same result but with less liability. Or are FR pilots now under so much pressure to start at any cost that they would take off with a hysterical passenger on board? :\

So, you are suggesting that the yellow bit is the bit damaged in the photo??

Really??

Give me strength ...

Look again at the photo of the damage, and then at the photo linked in post #83.

Mr Boeing has helpfully provided those 4 static wicks on the outboard stabilizer (not the elevator) to help any of us with depth perception issues.

If that's not enough, read the CIAIAC report with its 4 references to the stabiliser being struck/damaged.

:ugh:

At the end of the day you have to ask yourself- If you see an incident out of an aircraft window as a passenger, how far can your protest go if you believe that the safety of the flight is in question?

You must have the right to refuse to fly and be returned to the gate if you honestly believe your life may be put at risk.

Cabin crew CRM must cover this area. Cabin crew should made aware that any reported defect seen on the outside of the aircraft should be immediately reported to the flight deck. It should also be recorded in the cabin crew flight report.

I recall that Nigel in one of his 777's taxied to and took off unintentionally from a very short intersection in St Kitts. Strangely enough, yet again an 'engineer' passenger advised the cabin crew during taxi that the aircraft was taxiing to the wrong runway entry point. Subsequently, a big song and dance was made as to how important it is to heed information eminating from the cabin as a reult of that cock up. It seems that this advice has not penetrated the ethos of Ryanair operations.

BA passengers tried to halt 777 take-off after taxiing error (http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/ba-passengers-tried-to-halt-777-take-off-after-taxiing-346898/)

On one of (countless) J41 trips, a sealing strip or mastic on the outside of the window I was next to gradually loosened and peeled off over the course of an hour. I told CC who alerted flight deck and on landing was thanked by CC for bringing it to their attention. Now it probably wasn't anything of concern but I didn't know that. The flight deck possibly even had a laugh at the SLF's ignorance.

At least to my face however they treated it seriously and that scores brownie points for me.

The captain of the aircraft that hit the 767 was a femaleAnd the relevance of that comment to this thread is . . . ?

The captain of the aircraft that hit the 767 was a female

And the relevance of that comment to this thread is . . . ?

To instill thought of a sexist and chauvinistic nature. You might not care to say it, but I'm sure plenty have thought it.

...or is this the PC parade float passing by??

Either way both comments are irrelevant to the thread

You're right - both comments are irrelevant but
You might not care to say it, but I'm sure plenty have thought it.How sad. We have come nowhere in a thousand years.

You must have the right to refuse to fly and be returned to the gate if you honestly believe your life may be put at risk.
Remove your seat belt, stand up and refuse to get back into your seat while taxying. That action will practically ensure a return to gate.......but you had better be damn sure that you are in the right.

To instill thought of a sexist and chauvinistic nature. You might not care to say it, but I'm sure plenty have thought it.

...or is this the PC parade float passing by??

Either way both comments are irrelevant to the thread
If she WAS a female, what is she now? Has she been gender-reassigned as part of her demotion to FO?;)

but you had better be damn sure that you are in the right.

Why 'had' you better be in the right? Surely any professional pilot/commander would be grateful that a passenger had drawn to her/his attention something that may threaten the safety of the flight, even if it transpired that the cause for alarm was ungrounded? Even if it causes a delay/inconvenience. Better to arrive late and alive than dead on time, surely?

The topic of 'what to do' as a pax was thoroughly explored on the thread about the Spanair Madrid crash where someone pointed out that a certain type/types? might correctly take-off without flap. It is an interesting thought. What to do then? There is a line between having every T D & H stopping a flight and a 'qualified' observer doing it.

Well, I'm sure no crew would be happy to be delayed by a nervous pax who thinks the wings will "fall off" because they're flexing up and down at every bump in the pavement. := If you actually act in a way that will force a return to gate for no good reason you might end up being escorted off premises by the police and later charged.

If you clearly witnessed a collision with another aircraft or ground structure or actually saw a piece fall off the wing than by all means act as crazy as you can in order to prevent the plane from taking off, even if you are not in a position to evaluate whether there was any actual damage and to what extent the damage might interfere with the safe operation of the aircraft. Any such occurrence needs to be properly investigated prior to the aircraft being returned to service. You cannot be blamed if upon later inspection it is determined that there was no damage or the extent of the damage did not make the aircraft unairworthy.

And to the person who said it was normal to have full opposite deflection of the ailerons - well that may be. But I've been on a large number of DC-9 flights and never saw that before. And they did pull out of line. Whatever, it did no harm to just calmly point and speak out. Maybe it did some good.

In general, full opposite deflection of ailerons is preferable to full deflection in the same direction. :)
Good on them for pulling out of line, I would do the same if somebody told me I had a problem with my aircraft. Not sure why they thought running flaps in and out would cure an aileron problem, maybe just do something to calm down an anxious passenger?

Elevators work the same way:

http://i145.photobucket.com/albums/r208/captain_daniel_25/IMG_0660.jpg

In 1990 several of us heard a noise from the top of the cabin of a BA 747 as it taxied at San Francisco airport.
It was a bang and then sounded like something was rolling around in for want of a better word the ceiling of the cabin.
The cabin crew were informed and one of them spoke to I presume the flight deck via the intercom. However the plane
just kept going but when it got to the end of the runway, lined up for take off it did it again. The intercom was used again
but the result was we just took off anyway and no announcement was made, all the cabin crew person said was "everything is in order"
There were several other slightly concerned passengers as well as myself but we all felt we had better just shut up and not say anything more.
As we landed it did it again but as we were safe on the ground no-one said a word.

Ok, I'm curious now. Why would the MD-8x have opposite deflecting elevators? This is a fly by REAL wires aircraft so I'm surprised that the mechanicals allow this deflection to occur. The picture shows a taxiing aircraft with flaps deployed so all hydraulic systems would be pressurised.... I'd call it if I saw that.

As previously mentioned, I remember seeing a F100 commence the take-off role and I commented to my Capt that he was clean (the F100...) and quick as a flash he said "aircraft rolling, check flap" to which they replied "thanks, we take-off clean".

If you see something as a pax or a crew you MUST highlight it. Period.

As ManaAdaSystem stated in his post #57, the ailerons and elevators on the DC-9 were operated by tabs so they could be hanging anywhere on the ground.

I flew the Short Belfast for many years and all of our control surfaces were controlled by servo tabs. So, when we took the control locks out, the rudder would normally follow whatever the surface wind was doing, both ailerons normally fell down and the elevators could be anywhere.

This used to cause all sorts of calls from the folks outside. On one occasion I was told several times by the aircraft behind me that both of my ailerons were hanging down. "Thank you" said I. "Are you going to go flying like that"? "Indeed we are" said I. Silence from behind.

All surfaces would normally streamline at 90 knots on take-off.

All surfaces would normally streamline at 90 knots on take-off. :\

Any occasions when they didn't? :eek:

Not that I remember; we had five control surface position indicators on the captain's glareshield so a quick glance would show where they all were.

A4, Yea, i flew the F100 for a few years and we regularly took off with no flap. It was quite common for the one behind to mention it to us as we lined up.

Yes, those 'little Fokkers' caused a fair bit of confusion in the early days at LGW, what with random elevator positions, anti-cols that looked like strobes, no flap - all too difficult.:)

At the risk of being banned for thread drift, there was a great story doing the rounds some years ago about a USAF C-130 taxiing for take-off behind a LH 747 at Frankfurt.

The C-130 called the 747 on Frankfurt Ground and asked him to call back on 123.45. The C-130 was told in no uncertain terms that LH did not use unauthorised frequencies.

"Fine" said the C-130, "I just wanted to tell you that you still have your gear pins fitted"!

Hey nervous SLF
In 1990 several of us heard a noise from the top of the cabin of a BA 747 as it taxied at San Francisco airport.
To ease your state of mind: there aren't many things that will bring down a jet after take-off, certainly not things that make rumbling noises behind ceiling panels.
What will bring down a jet are flaps, trim or lack of flightcontrols. These are often referred to as "killer items".

I understand your anxiety about the noises you but you shouldn't worry about them.
What will kill you is a wrong setting of flaps or stabilizer (which was hit by the Ryanair), hence the discussion here.

No need to stand up or open door/blow slide. Just claim chest pain with suspected heart attack. Anyone have a better way to stop the departure?

FKR 100/70:- The last real aeroplane

If you haven't done it you won't have a clue what I'm talking about.

A truly "magic" aeroplane

'nough said !!

I'm convinced something got lost in the translation.

There is no way any pilot, regardless of status, would ignore a collision report and carry on without a just to be sure check...

Tell me I right here...

I'm convinced something got lost in the translation.

There is no way any pilot, regardless of status, would ignore a collision report and carry on without a just to be sure check...

mini, notwithstanding what the report says, I think herein lies the answer. Remember a ground incident in USA where vital time was lost in a fire because the cabin crew could not explain in clear simple english where the fire was and how serious it was.

Ryanair employ a multiplicity of crews from many different cultures/backgrounds/countries. Nothing wrong with that but although flightdeck are required to prove proficiency in English to a certain standard as par of licence renewal there is, as far as I am aware, no legal requirement for cabin crew.

I am sure if this Captain had received a CLEAR unambiguous message that their aircraft had been in collision with another aircraft AND that there was suspected damage the outcome would have been different.

Am not blaming any individuals here - this incident was a product of the "system" and includes elements of minimal experience (FO), lack of training, culture, language etc

although flightdeck are required to prove proficiency in English to a certain standard as par of licence renewal there is, as far as I am aware, no legal requirement for cabin crew

Or, in this case (Spanish domestic flight BCN-IBZ), proficiency in Spanish.

From the report:

"They [the passengers] were speaking in Spanish, so the cabin crew did not understand very well what they were saying."

autoflight Quote:- "No need to stand up or open door/blow slide. Just claim chest pain with suspected heart attack. Anyone have a better way to stop the departure?"

Generally, one would hope that this would work.

However if you read the "Corpse on Plane" posts in the African Aviation Forum (dated 2nd July 2012), this might not have any effect if you are flying KLM - allegedly.

Great input, well done.:ugh:

The trouble is that you can't have a thread about Ryanair, even on a serious matter, without the twelve year olds trotting out their hysterical comedy.

Someone needs another "S" in their handle - right after the first one.

ASFKAP Quote:- "I doubt this incident even happened....http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/confused.gif
I've just had a look on the 'News' section on Ryanair.com (http://www.ryanair.com/ie/news/) and they make no mention of it.....http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/confused.gif"

You weren't seriously expecting an airline (any airline) to publish its errors, misdemeanours, poor PR, complaints, ATC violations etc. etc. on their website?

Or were you?

Since you looked at the airline in question's website, was there any denial of the alleged incident?

Sarcasm radar not working kids????

Obviously it's sarcasm. It's just unfunny and contributes nothing. Perhaps there could be a separate thread into which all this kind of garbage gets binned, allowing the grown ups to discuss grown up matters unimpeded.

On the heart attack ploy -- I guess the question is whether you'd trust your life a possibly damaged aircraft or to a piece of automatic defibrillator software.:uhoh:

ASFKAP

Why would it be in the news. It happened in April 2011 :ugh:

Is there not the facility within RYR to file an ASR and tick the MOR box thus resulting in it having to be forwarded to the Authority?

Yes A4 all reports filed at work will also go to the IAA!
Forgive me if i am wrong but i don't expect this is the case unless things have changed since it all went onto computers. Certainly when we used to fill all of this stuff in on paper, companies would decide themselves how important the report was. I think it was something like most serious would go to the authorities within 48 hours or so. Not so serious within the month, and others just went on file. The flight ops inspector may then have seen it on one of their audits.
Maybe someone in the know could comment?

Just a few weeks ago, I was sitting aboard one of FRs competitors (as SLF) when we had taxied just short of the holding point. After aileron and spoiler checks were done (twice on the Airbus) I noted no flap or slat deployment.

I immediately undid my belt and went to the back of the aircraft as it was the nearest to me and told one of the cabin crew. He immediately told me to get back to my seat and I said no, not until he called the flight deck to let them know of my concern. He duly made the call and indeed, half way through the call - control surfaces were deployed.

After the flight, I was called to the flight deck to chat with the flightdeck crew. They had selected flaps after engine 1 start but they had not deployed until much later- something I had not seen before. The crew duly thanked me and said they would inform maintenance immediately.

I didn't fancy a short flight on a full A320 ISA+15 with no flaps/slats selected for take off!!

Hmmm

Whilst I'm not against SLF questioning genuine problems such as a collision, you can rest assured that regardless of the temperature there were plenty of things in place to catch this error.

The TO Config push button would have sounded a warning when pressed and if the crew had forgotten to press the config check button the warning would have sounded as soon as the thrust levers were advanced for takeoff. Also the before takeoff checklist would have a check of the flap setting, and a check of the take off memo both of which would have identified the error.

I would imagine that there must be many daily occurrences worldwide of pilots forgetting to set the flaps and they're always caught by the many checks that are in place. I know that accidents have occurred in the past and taking off without flaps would most likely be fatal, however pilots are human beings, they will make mistakes or omissions and there are systems in place to catch those errors or omissions.

I should also point out that in some cases (Contaminated taxyway, or remote deicing) it's SOP for some A320 operators to leave the flaps retracted until lining up.

Being type rated on the A320 I wouldn't be getting out of my seat had I observed the same thing as you. If we got as far as lining up on the runway I would start getting concerned and take some action, but only then.

I also agree with BOAC, the pilots were fobbing you off, they simply forgot to set the flaps.

Out of interest have you ever flown on a Dash 8 Q400? They line up with their spoilers extended, that was a little concerning the first time I saw it. Lucky they retract the moment the take off roll is commenced.

It doesn't always work out well for us though, you only have to look at the building industry, the banking industry and at some point in the future the aviation industry.... That's a very interesting observation, and unfortunately very true! All we need is to do is wait for the next crash and; the regulators will claim that they didn't see it coming, the big airlines will claim it wasn't their fault and the public will pay the ultimate price! What I really wonder is: WHERE IS THE MEDIA in all of this?! Have we all been fooled into thinking that the media is there to keep the politicians honest and the big corporations in check, while in reality they're just there to brainwash the general public?

For all the people advocating that the average passenger will start some sort of mutiny because 'they think something isn't quite right,' perhaps here is some food for thought: http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/492225-man-jumps-out-before-plane-takes-off.html

Chu Chu, and AED won't defibrillate you if you are faking it. It only shocks when necessary and won't always deliver a shock on a collapsed person since there is not always fibrilliation present... (as I understand it)

Sky Wave, true, but was there not an accident of this nature when the T/O config warning failed to sound because pilots had been pulling the CB to stop the 'annoying' false alarm happening on ground? (Can't recall the airline at present but there was only one survivor- a child)

Imagine if something similar had happened- config warning not working, pilots miss a step in the c/l for whatever reason (it happens) and the guy getting up to call the crew was actually the last chance to stop the holes lining up- I'd certainly rather feel dumb and be delayed 5 min than be dead!

Unless they changed policy this last couple of years no Defibrilator carried on board Ryanair (not even a "pay -to- shock" version :rolleyes: ) so feign away on Air O' Leary.

Speaking of Regulators & the IAA in the same sentence is a bit of a contradiction, whatever FR have wanted, they have always received, with the sole exception of approval to take-off with ice on the upper surfaces in the specified area permitted by Boeing (or did they finally get that one ? ) .

Have you noticed how many "dodgy" looking aircraft operating in far flung countries for airlines you have never heard of have EI- *** registration.
Ireland is to commercial aviation what Panama was (still is ? ) to shipping, a "flag of convenience". . . . . I wonder why that would be ? :hmm:

Agree with Sky Wave regarding the flaps. On the 320 they are set from memory after engine start. Afterwards there is a whole set of procedures and flight control checks and taxi-ing before the point is reached where the crew check the flaps by..

-the take off config with a push button
-the checklist including the flap setting
-applying TO-power which again should automatically check the flaps

So the fact that they were doing flight control checks just tells me that they had not reached that point of checking yet. Sloppy? Yes. Drama? Not yet.

Never the less, I've been in your position where the crew taxied away without any flaps set and I was watching like a hawk!

CPS we were given clearance to T/O with frost in the box but it was later withdrawn and it is back to a clean wing procedure.

Paper bag got lost in the post. . . ? ;)

"Have you noticed how many "dodgy" looking aircraft operating in far flung countries for airlines you have never heard of have EI- *** registration.
Ireland is to commercial aviation what Panama was (still is ? ) to shipping, a "flag of convenience". . . . . I wonder why that would be ?"

Quite, and ironically started by Tony Ryan in another life.

Heard an Irish Minister crowing about this and saying they were looking at other 'opportunities'

It goes with the territory, Panama saw the opening a long time ago, Ireland is now in the business of being a low tax service industry hub. As such they join "The City" for example in offering light regulation environments for dubious activities. However, airframe registration should not be dubious.

After the flight, I was called to the flight deck to chat with the flightdeck crew. They had selected flaps after engine 1 start but they had not deployed until much later- something I had not seen before. The crew duly thanked me and said they would inform maintenance immediately.

I didn't fancy a short flight on a full A320 ISA+15 with no flaps/slats selected for take off!! Hmmm

Whilst I'm not against SLF questioning genuine problems such as a collision, you can rest assured that regardless of the temperature there were plenty of things in place to catch this error.On the other hand, if an slf had spotted no slats and flaps on the Spanair flight at Madrid, a lot of lives would have been saved.