'Empty' Operations on passenger aircraft

[Make it so]

What does your airline do to help your pilots on these flights (long range ones in particular) especially with regard to;

Training for cabin fire fighting and fire watch;

Training in use of galley procedures where hot food is to be provided and how to manage galley equipment 'problems';

Training related to safe food handling;

Procedures to ensure any rest taken in flight does not result in both pilots asleep?

[Floppy Link]

Last time I did one (Goa to Gatwick), we had a cabin crew chap with us as well.

[Make it so]

What sort of duties was he supposed to undertake i.e Firewatch; pre-departure security/ cabin prep checks? Does your company allow empty flights with only two pilots?

[FE Hoppy]

What sort of duties was he supposed to undertake i.e Firewatch; pre-departure security/ cabin prep checks? Does your company allow empty flights with only two pilots?

AFM limitations section:
Min Crew 2

Normal procedures
Normal Ops
Everything else is jobsworth and not required.

[Rainboe]

Rather strange off the cuff questions! Perhaps you could explain what is your interest in order the answers may be more directed towards your sphere of interest?

As far as fire training, this is part of annual training for pilots which involves occasional extinguisher discharge under Fire Service supervision. Pilots are well briefed on Emergency equipment and locations and all aspects of handling airborne fires.

Pilots are not trained to handle food, but eminently qualified to eat it. Freight dogs may be trained in food handling, but from what I can see, they probably don't even bother to cook it. Just stick a little stick in it and suck it in their seats like a giant lollipop.

Long range flights have relief crews with opportunities for rest in rotation. Difficult to answer more without knowing why you wish to know.

[Hand Solo]

I suspect his interest is the forthcoming spell of freighter flying in BA due to cabin crew shortages.

[chornedsnorkack]

As far as fire training, this is part of annual training for pilots which involves occasional extinguisher discharge under Fire Service supervision. Pilots are well briefed on Emergency equipment and locations and all aspects of handling airborne fires.

Most small and modern airliners can be flown by two pilots. But some of them complain that it is not enough, and that a flight engineer makes a real difference in handling in-flight emergencies.

It is legitimate to fly an airliner by one pilot - briefly. The main legitimate excuse for this is a toilet break. The pilot left in the cockpit is supposed to wear an oxygen mask while alone.

Another legitimate excuse is "controlled rest", with one pilot sleeping in the cockpit seat and the other awake and alert.

A passenger airliner with passengers and flight attendants on board has the attendants in cabin. In case of a cabin fire, the attendants are trained to fight the fire in cabin while the pilots can fly the plane and use whatever cockpit controls are still functioning to deal with the matter.

Are the pilots instructed to stay in cockpit at all emergencies (and return there if an emergency happens during a toilet break), or are they trained and allowed to go to the cabin to fight the fire while the other pilot reads checklists and deals with all the technical failures alone?

Again, when pilots fly with passengers and flight attendants, the flight attendants normally cook/warm meals for the pilots as well, and bring them to cockpit.

If the pilots fly just two of them and without attendant, is a pilot prepared to go back to galley to cook a meal, stay away from cockpit till it is completed (and possibly deal with the galley breaking down) and return, while the other pilot is flying the plane alone?

Also, pilots should try and avoid both pilots falling asleep simultaneously. But if it actually does happen, a cabin attendant can open the cockpit door and if neither pilot is awake to override the door opening, the attendant awakens the pilots. If there are just two pilots aboard, this is not an option.

[Make it so]

Thanks for all the answers so far. It may be that UK airlines will need to be more stringent in their examination of the risks involved in operating an empty aircraft with a minimum crew of 2 pilots? A very interesting suggestion about a single pilot (pee/tea break for the other pilot for example, or cabin patrol etc) donning an EROS mask. Another suggested elsewhere that pilots entering an underfloor area should always carry/wear a portable O2 set. I don't remember that being pushed out as an SOP at anytime. Very good idea though.

[FE Hoppy]

Thanks for all the answers so far. It may be that UK airlines will need to be more stringent in their examination of the risks involved in operating an empty aircraft with a minimum crew of 2 pilots?

Why? Is there any reason to suspect the current rules are deficient or is this just another crusade to fix a problem that doesn't exist?

[Desert Diner]

Journo perhaps?

[Make it so]

Not a Journo (perish the thought) just looking to see if there are differences between different airlines in standards of operating such flights. Current Operating Procedures in some operators may well be deficient in this area especially in light of changes to the health and safety legislation that now applies to passenger aircraft.

An FAA report shows that worldwide in-flight fires, smoke or fumes events account for 3 precautionary landings per day (1999 figures). Fire detection and suppression systems in aircraft cabins are normally toilet smoke detectors and or human – arguably inadequate for empty operations on passenger aircraft, especially when compared to systems installed in the passenger aircraft holds or those in dedicated cargo/freighter types.

Have airlines considered the risks involved in these operations or how to minimise or mitigate the effects of them? Shouldn’t airline management address concerns about aspects of their operations put forward by the pilots and treat them as genuine attempts to enhance safety rather than irritating distractions from the business of running an airline?

[FE Hoppy]

Current Operating Procedures in some operators may well be deficient in this area especially in light of changes to the health and safety legislation that now applies to passenger aircraft.


Have airlines considered the risks involved in these operations or how to minimise or mitigate the effects of them?

The risk involved in not complying to a change in the health and safety regulations?

CS25 sets the requirement. The operators meet it as layed down in the AFM. No pax = less risk not more!!

[Make it so]

The risks involved should be determined by a Risk Assesment.

[Dream Land]

Please tell us why you think it's riskier than a flight with cabin crew on board. :E

[chornedsnorkack]

Please tell us why you think it's riskier than a flight with cabin crew on board.

Because if there is no cabin crew and the passenger cabin is empty, there is no one around to detect fires early or fight them while both flight crew remain in cockpit flying the plane and handling their systems controls.

It is true that with no one in cabin, there is less chance of a fire breaking out to begin with. But does this outweigh and more than outweigh the problems detecting and fighting a fire if and when it does break out?

[Dream Land]

In each instance that I have previously dealt with smoke or fire indication, the pilots had to inform the cabin crew. :eek:

[CR2]

On the 74F, we turn oven on, set it for 20mins, insert food (minus any plastic bits). When said oven goes "ding", one puts oven gloves on, removes food, consumes same (after of course removing oven gloves - makes it easier to hold knife & fork).

Should anything turn to poo, there is a circuit breaker on the oven & a fire extinguisher (trained in use of) at arm's length.

;)

Monkeys (and Freight Dogs) trainable in about 5 mins for said task.

[Make it so]

Is the galley left unattended whilst the food is heating and are there any smoke detectors in the galley area if not?

Have you been given any form of instruction or advice by your company with regard to safe food handling and so on?

[CR2]

Sometimes to first part, no to second part. Detectors would complicate having a ciggie :}

Handling food: You gotta be kidding, right? :rolleyes: I personally make sure I use the bathroom before cooking, not washing hands of course. :confused:

[ZFT]

Make it so

Risk Assessment, Domestic Science instructions!!!!! H & S is yet another manufactured industry a la security. Adds considerable cost and zero value.

What ever happened to common sense?

[Make it so]

Various bits of legislation cover food handling and I am not aware of any airlines that train their pilots to the required standard. Commercial operators ensure that adequate training is provided to cabin crew with regard to the handling of food though.

Skills are enhanced by adequate training and provision of tools to do the job. It is debatable whether giving pilots a list of circuit breakers to pull (slight over simplification) and a box of food without any instructions could be classed as adequate training.

H&S legislation is a cornerstone of safe operations in just about every area of working life these days and I have no doubt that businesses of many kinds have tried to duck their obligations on the basis that their area is 'Special' or 'It's never been a problem until now' (or maybe even 'We see no need to mollycoddle our staff - They're well paid and can look after them selves).

[FE Hoppy]

Various bits of legislation cover food handling and I am not aware of any airlines that train their pilots to the required standard.

Would you care to quote the regulation for preperation of ones own food?

[Make it so]

Quote <Food Safety (General Food Hygiene) Regulations 1995
Food Safety (Temperature Control) Regulations 1995

These are Regulations made under The Food Safety
Act 1990. Similar laws apply in Northern Ireland.
These two sets of Regulations apply to all types
of food, and food business, but they do not cover
primary production or food prepared in the home
for domestic purposes. >

http://www.food.gov.uk/multimedia/pdfs/safetyaw.pdf

[Make it so]

By the way, I am merely seeking information on how other pilots/operators manage such flights.

Many thanks for the ideas so far.

[WHBM]

The experts in this area are the ferry crews who spend their lives transferring new (and not-so-new) aircraft round the world. As far as I am aware a ferry crew does not run to any cabin crew !

[FE Hoppy]

Quote <Food Safety (General Food Hygiene) Regulations 1995
Food Safety (Temperature Control) Regulations 1995


No requirements for training of people who do not handle other peoples food.

You should ask this question to the freight dogs, but be ready for a somewhat less civil response.

[chornedsnorkack]

Pilots flying freight or empty passenger plane are not only preparing their own food, but also that of mate, I guess?

On passenger planes, there are supposed to be strict rules against allowing both pilots to eat the same meals - presumably to guard against double pilot food poisoning. Do those rules apply on freight and ferry flights as well?

[Shiny side down]

I've ferried a few flights, and empty sectored quite a few.

1. Passengers are generally the most damaging cargo from personal experience, even on business jets. or especially? Removing the source of the risks generally reduces the risks.
The aircraft are generally consistently built.
The crews are generally consistently trained.

2. Pilots, like everyone else, are capable of some common sense and reason (notwithstanding some of the little spats that go on on here) I've managed quite well, preparing my own food over the years, and have been quite unsuccesful in gaining a promotion by preparing the other blokes food. There's always the fire axe.

3. I sometimes wonder if many of the regulations are there to safeguard other people, or to simply make it easier to point the finger or prosecute someone in the event of an incident. My own paranoia, big brother, etc.

4. I have been involved in a double pilot food poisoning. It makes bugger all difference if the food is selected off different menus, or is simply different, if the source of the problem is the food prep company. Which it was. And often is. Eating at different times is probably valid, but by how long?

Actually, come to think of it, I have had serious food poisoning 4 times over the years, only once while flying. Each time it came down to food prepared professionally; either a restaurant, or food prep company. All of which should have been impossible according to whatever regulatory authority.

I like the idea of having a certain amount of SOP to operate to. But it will become a very strange place if everything was written into rigid SOPs.

And you can't fix everything with an SOP. Some free thinking is essential to survival.