A320 Dual Engine Failure ECAM procedures

[captainpaddy]

Hello, I'm confused again and need expert help,

Recently been told by instructor that the ECAM can be used for the initial actions following a dual engine failure as this could save time fumbling around (possibly in the dark) for the QRH and then fumbling around trying to find the right page.

My question is:

I realise the ECAM will recognise the engine failures and display the ECAM warning for DUAL ENG FAIURE. But when the engines spool down and AC generation is lost (APU not running), will it not decide that EMER ELEC CONFIG has occurred and that this is more important and display that drill instead while moving the dual engine failure down the list? So now you would have to clear this warning (and maybe others) to get back to the ENG DUAL FAILURE warning? Sounds very messy indeed.

Is this not the reason why Airbus say you should really use the QRH first, then clear the ECAM?

CP

[Don Coyote]

From the FCOM:

This warning inhibits the EMER ELEC CONFIG warning. The FCOM Volume 3 provides the ENG DUAL FAILURE steps that appear on the ECAM. However, to facilitate handling of all the ECAM procedures linked to the dual engine failure situation :
– It is recommended that the flight crew use the ENG DUAL FAILURE QRH paper
procedure
– If time permits, it is also recommended that the flight crew clear the ECAM warnings
– This QRH procedure includes the ditching and forced landing procedures.

So the EMER ELEC CONFIG warning is inhibited.

[captainpaddy]

Don,

Many thanks for the reply. That's very interesting, just looking at FCOM 3 now.

However, I don't see how you have come to the conclusion that the EMER ELEC CONFIG will be inhibited. Do you mean that the DUAL ENG FAILURE will have a higher priority and will be displayed first with EMER ELEC CONFIG down the list somwhere or that it won't be displayed at all? (I realise our version of FCOM 3 may not have the same info)

I have read the paragraph at the top of FCOM 3.02.70 p20 (REV 38) and took it to imply that all sorts of warnings and cautions may be displayed so rather than try determine which is more important and potentially be distracted by other ones resulting from the dual failure, use the QRH.

The steps on the ECAM and in the QRH are almost identical except for the QRH calling for figuring out where you are going to land and O2 masks on and some other minor bits. I have understood this to mean that the ECAM will tell you to put on the O2 masks but not until the Cab Alt has exceeded 10,000ft. At this stage it would decide that staying alive is more important and it would display the warning CAB PR EXCESS CAB ALT at the top and have you do this drill (and/or clear it) to get back to the DUAL ENG FAILURE. This is why the QRH is recommended. Using this logic, I would assume that this could happen for some other warning that occurs after the engine failures too. However, I may just be entirely wrong!!!!

Short Version:
1: Do you think my instructor has a valid point in saying do the ECAM first to speed the attempt at a relight? (Of course, I accept that if Airbus says......)

2: Why exactly do Airbus say use the QRH for a drill that is potentially so time critical? (There must be a fairly significant reason for Airbus to admit that their beloved ECAM may not be the best option!)

CP

[FlapsOne]

Where does it say that it is inhibited?

The paper procedure refers to the Emerg Gen which may, or may not, have come on line automatically depending on the sequence of events.

[moleslayer]

captainpaddy & other posters............

The requirement to immediately use the QRH in preference to the ECAM procedure for the 'all-engine-out' scenario was the subject of an AIRBUS INDUSTRIE symposium held last year. Similar recommendations for 'smoke' procedures were made at the same time.

The reasons are complex, and are set out in a powerpoint presentation distributed by AI. Your company training department should be aware of this, and either copies made available, or a text precis setting out the salient points.

Because of the critical nature and seriousness of this event occurring without you guys apparently being aware of the correct procedure to follow, then I am prepared to send you a copy of the ppt if you email me.

moley.

[captainpaddy]

Moley,

Thanks a million, that would be great.

It's nice to see this forum working to it's full extent. I agree that this is a very serious issue.

Cheers,

CP

P.S. Check your inbox.:ok:

[moleslayer]

Hi Cap'npaddy.........this is a copy of email sent @ 1745.

Here is the AI ppt. for 'allengineout'.
I'll send the 'smoke' by seperate email in case it clogs your mailbox (hotmail?)

I don't usually reply to the run-of-the-mill tech questions, but I feel very strongly about these 'critical' procedures and often feel that company training departments aren't adequately disseminating this type of information to the 'troops' on the line.

Get in touch if you need more help.

Moley.

[captainpaddy]

Hats off to ya! :ok:

CP

[Don Coyote]

The following is a direct quote from FCOM 3.02.70 page 20 (the bold type is added by me):

This warning inhibits the EMER ELEC CONFIG warning. The FCOM Volume 3 provides the ENG DUAL FAILURE steps that appear on the ECAM. However, to facilitate handling of all the ECAM procedures linked to the dual engine failure situation :
– It is recommended that the flight crew use the ENG DUAL FAILURE QRH paper
procedure
– If time permits, it is also recommended that the flight crew clear the ECAM warnings
– This QRH procedure includes the ditching and forced landing procedures.

Our version is revision 39 so that may be the reason for the difference. The reason for change was " TECHNICAL AMENDMENT Page revised : 1)For improved technical understanding and standardization. 2)To update the ENGINE DUAL FAILURE procedure in order to clarify the pitch attitude setting required to reach the optimum relight speed , when the speed indication is not available."

Cant remember exactly how it all occured last time I did it in the sim but I guess that if you do the paper procedure then some of the ECAM warnings will dissappear as they will be resolved by the paper procedure. Sorry I cant help more than that.

[captainpaddy]

Ah, that explains the confusion. My (apparently old) revision doesn't say anything about EMER ELEC CONFIG.

Moleslayers .ppt seems to basically say that the new paper procedure covers all problems in one go and avoids the requirement to refer to many seperate procedures. It also mentions that other warnings triggered by the engine failures may distract the crew by asking for pointless actions like turning off hydraulic pumps because of low pressure, etc, etc.

One line says "QRH use in ESSENTIAL"

Fair enough! May thanks for all your comments and input guys!

Don, I think I'll have to get on to my crowd and ask them to update my paperwork!!!

Cheers!

CP

If anyone has sim experience of this, then take notes and let me know what happens!!

[wheresthecoffee]

It makes sense to inhibit the warning.

The EEC drill incudes a load of stuff that would be totally pointless in the event of a dual eng failure and would waste time. The only useful one would probably be the EMERG ELEC PWR which is included in the dual failure drill (QRH) anyway.