B-HIH -v- tractor at ARN: Swedish accident report

[akerosid]

A report by the Swedish air accident investigation authority SHK has cited fatigue as a contributory factor in a collision between B747-200F B-HIH and a tractor.

PICTURES: Cathay 747 tractor collision inquiry cites crew fatigue (http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2008/10/09/317279/pictures-cathay-747-tractor-collision-inquiry-cites-crew-fatigue.html)

[Cumguzzler]

I think the capatin was part of the gereactric crowd (55+). Maybe it was past his bed time?

[N1 Vibes]

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzCRUNCHzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz:zzz:

[Basil]

The pilots had been awake for 18-20 hours by the time of the accident
I wonder why?
It would seem sensible ALWAYS to park the tractor where it can be clearly seen from the flight deck to be in an obstructing position which would reduce the risk of running over the gnd eng as well.

[Sir Richard]

Standard practice by Big Airways at Thiefrow I believe....:E

[Glass Half Empty]

Is CX QM mentioned in the report. Substandard language and ground engineering SOPs contrary to CX SOPs. A good choice to place the ground handling with those muppets.

[buggaluggs]

It'll be interesting to see how the boys upstairs will spin that one! Awake for 18-20 hrs at the BEGINNING of the flight, and it's what? 4 or 5 hours to DXB :zzz:
I can hear crew control echoing in my ears..... " yeah but it's legal!! " Can't wait for the upcoming AFTL review to improve the situation !!! NOT!!! :ugh:

Buggs out

[SMOC]

The spin doctors are in.......

Hong Kong disputes report blaming fatigue for Cathay ground collision (http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2008/10/15/317484/hong-kong-disputes-report-blaming-fatigue-for-cathay-ground.html) :=

[HotDog]

Awake for 18-20 hrs at the BEGINNING of the flight, and it's what? 4 or 5 hours to DXB

Buggaluggs, you obviously have no knowledge or concept of Cathay's mandatory flight time limitations, which are stricktly adhered to. What you do to control adequate rest periods prior to flight is your own concern:rolleyes:

[FlexibleResponse]

Swedish investigators believe pilot fatigue contributed to a Cathay Pacific Boeing 747-200 freighter's sustaining heavy engine damage after accidentally taxiing into its tow-tractor at Stockholm Arlanda last year.

The pilots had been awake for 18-20 hours by the time of the accident, which occurred early on 25 June just after the jet had been pushed back from stand R9 for a service to Dubai.


But the Hong Kong Civil Aviation Department's flight standards division says: "It is noted that the crew had been rostered to have adequate rest and there was no evidence in the report that the crew suffered from fatigue."

This is weird...The pilots had been rostered for adequate rest...but had been awake for 18-20 hours at push-back.

How could those statements of fact lead to a conclusion by CAD Flight Standards that "there was no evidence in the report that the crew suffered from fatigue"?

[XFR8]

Ladies & Gents,

The CAD and crew control are much better judges of your fatigue level than you are. If you aren't sure just how fatigued you are just call crew control or the CAD to find out. If no reply from them, try Corporate Communications.

If you are really very fatigued but can't get hold of any of the above. Check if it's legal. If it is, then go to work or continue with present duty.

If the duty is refused, your name will join the 'Hit-list' via crew control input.

Please be guided accordingly.:ok:

PS. Wanted. New Star Chamber members

[buggaluggs]

Hotgod, I think you missed my point, and by the way I’m fully aware of the workings of the FTL! However, a fair number of said rules fall squarely within the “ legal but stupid” zone! And often get stretched even further due to creative interpretation by the company.
A good example being the 2-man crew freighter service to MEL, with a sign on of around 01:30 !! Must be nice to be able to interpret rules the in the most commercially advantageous manner. :ugh:


Buggs out