PDA

View Full Version : Some questions for Simulator Checks - good for all


ricfly744
11th Apr 2009, 11:28
Hello fellow aviators.

I always wanted to know more about these. Can you help?

Should we maintain present heading or turn before an emergency descent.
I say turn, my SIM instructor said keep heading.
Most regulations e.g. RVSM, NATS, Specific country and Europe emergency procedures, are clear about innitiating a turn befre descent, so why some very senior and experienced SIM instructors say different?

Other point open for discussion is: You have just stopped after a heavy weight RTO near V1. Will you set Parking Brake? Will it hold? Commence PAX EVAC without parking brake? Is it likely that brakes will be incandescent or even on fire?

Some people stop the ACFT when there is fire, taking a cross wind in consideration others say just stop on the center line. What would you do?

Is there a new standard fraseology for TCAS RA maneuvers? Someone said it is not TCAS CLIMB or TCAS DESCENT anymore but RA CLIMB/DESCENT. Never read this.

If there is any publication about any of those points, please, give us the link.

Nice flights to all! (REAL and SIMULATED)

kijangnim
11th Apr 2009, 11:59
Greetings,
For emergency descent, please refere to Jepessen part C, emergency and just apply the laid down procedure as per the area you are flying within, Europe for example says turn away from the traffic, talk to ATC (if you can) and then descent (O21 mask and crew com always applies first)
Your intructor did it the Boeing way "keep heading"
After RTO, you set the park brake on, PA "cabin crew at station" and deal with the emergency and ground evac if required.
Now if no ground evac is NOT required, then look at the brake temp, to be sure that it safe to resume taxy,AND be able to stop again.
remember that brakes transform cynetic energy into heat energy using friction, and have a heat absorbtion capacity that IS NOT unlimited.
The worst that can happen is that the fuse will melt and the tyres will deflate, remembering that your number one priority is passenger/crew safety, brake can burn, be glowing tyre can burst, your priority is ....

Engine fire, RTO and wind from the .... this emergency is time critical, but there is always a smart A##S who wants to outsmart and impress by saying that the wind is from the ... I will then turn ... I must admit though that in a movie, it will have some effect, in real life, different ball game, cross wind meaning you will turn at 90 deg from the runway, or run the risk of have a part of the aircraft outside the runway (which doesnot have the strenght to sustain the aircraft weight....
As far as I am concern, I include the wind information to the CSD, during the NITES briefing, and deal with the priority.

I never heard of RA CLIMB, baring in mind that RA only trigger reflexive maneuvers, ATC are familiar with TCAS, whereas RA :confused: I doubt it, on top on that RA will sound different, depending on who is saying it :ouch:

Boxshifter
11th Apr 2009, 12:17
Regarding TCAS/ACAS calls by the flight crew have a look here (http://www.bazl.admin.ch/fachleute/flugbetrieb/00326/01220/01265/index.html?lang=de&download=M3wBUQCu/8ulmKDu36WenojQ1NTTjaXZnqWfVpzLhmfhnapmmc7Zi6rZnqCkkIN4fnaDb KbXrZ2lhtTN34al3p6YrY7P1oah162apo3X1cjYh2+hoJVn6w==.pdf), it's on page 2, and at ICAO DOC 8168 (http://dcaa.slv.dk:8000/icaodocs/Doc%208168%20-%20Aircraft%20Operations/Doc%208168%20volumeI%20amdt.pdf).

Denti
11th Apr 2009, 12:19
As for TCAS the correct phraseology according to PANS-ATM (Procedures for Air Navigation Services, ICAO Doc. 4444 Fifteenth Edidtion 2007-ATM/501) states the following:


Circumstances:

... after a flight crew starts to deviate from any ATC clearance or instruction to comply with an ACAS resolution advisory (RA) (Pilot and controller interchange):
PILOT: [callsign] TCAS RA;
ATC: [callsign] ROGER;

... after the response to an ACAS RA is completed and a return to the ATC clearance or instruction is initiated (Pilot and controller interchange):
PILOT: [callsign] CLEAR OF CONFLICT, RETURNING TO (assigned clearance);
ATC: [callsign] ROGER (or alternative instructions);

after the response to an ACAS RA is completed and the assigned ATC clearance or instruction has been resumed (Pilot and controller interchange):
PILOT: [callsign] CLEAR OF CONFLICT (assigned clearance) RESUMED;
ATC: [callsign] ROGER (or alternative instructions);

after an ATC clearance or instruction contradictory to the ACAS RA is received, the flight crew will follow the RA and inform ATC directly (Pilot and controller interchange):
PILOT: [callsign] UNABLE, TCAS RA;
ATC: [callsign] ROGER;


That excerpt is copied from the Eurocontrol ACAS Site (http://www.eurocontrol.int/msa/public/standard_page/ACAS_ICAO_Provisions.html).

foff
11th Apr 2009, 12:35
hi,
It is clear that descending right on the track in the airway is a way to meet somebody during the descent. But if you had a direct clearance offtrack you may stay on heading since you're supposed to have a unique track (actually some direct tracks are sometimes a kind of unpublished airways). the behavior is finally to avoid any congested area. TCAS display could be a useful tool to helps choosing a track

always breaks ON after rejected take-off. you must analyse the situation at that time and get rid of any movement of the aircraft to do it. forget the brakes blockage. you will think of it after you decide to not evacuate.

let's consider you have pure crosswind. think of a big airplane to park cross on the runway (time to do it) and then no vehicles are able to circulate on the concrete that might not help for fire (and the rest) assistance. thus stay on the centerline.

to finish there is a new ICAO phraseology for the TCAS, from nov 2007.
search for PANS-ATM Amendment n5 on internet

ricfly744
11th Apr 2009, 14:12
Thanks to all for the prompt reply.

Denti, I have downloaded the Doc. you sent. Thank you much. It is a good one.:ok:

About the brakes, and crosswind, I would do the same you said, the problem is that Boeing says in the B744 QHR Man. 1.3 (April 1, 2008)

REJECTED TAKEOFF
Consider the following:
- wind direction in case of fire
- not setting parking brake unless passenger evacuation is necessary.

So, Boeing wants me to consider turning a B744 in the middle of a 60, or worse, 45m RWY for to avoid wind blowing a fire towards the fuselage. The distance from the engines to the fuselage is considerable for an eng. fire flame to reach it. As I can't ask Boeing why, I ask the world best pliots in PPrune.

I am curious about what Airbus A340/380 (eqv to B744) dictates.

Please, don`t stop, let's have more opinions and comments

Thanks again

ricfly744
11th Apr 2009, 14:27
Boxshifter, got your doc too. Great stuff.

thanks!

Ipaq
11th Apr 2009, 15:49
There's been recent guidance from the CAA about an aborted take-off with a fire:
FODCOM 08/09 | Publications | CAA (http://www.caa.co.uk/application.aspx?catid=33&pagetype=65&appid=11&mode=detail&id=3459)

kijangnim
11th Apr 2009, 20:17
Greetings
Thanks for the link to CAA, I had a look and obviously thing are changing, however I am a bit concerned, because behaviors triggered by a fire are going to be a mixture of reflexive and cognitive..

Rainboe
11th Apr 2009, 20:43
In my opinion, if you have an instructor who says it should be done his way, do it his way, otherwise do it how you think right!

Heavy weight RTO in a 747? The wheels are likely to go. You are very likely to evacuate. Damn everything else, set the brakes- you don't want that aeroplane moving with people coming down slides! So what if the brakes overheat? They are anyway! Maintenance issues should not affect human life! Set brakes and leave them- do you want to be standing outside and have the aeroplane start moving?

Fire and crosswind- I turn. Say to yourself
'in a headwind, turn into the on-fire engine
in a tailwind, turn away from the on-fire engine'.

We have a 737 that caught fire at Manchester that taught us in the UK that is a good idea!

TCAS RA new procedure correct. I think it is to stop confusion with calls for climb/descent by different people at the same time.

capt_akun
12th Apr 2009, 11:22
i thought the turn off the airway was more importantly to reduce the negative G on the aircraft and passengers. however, one thing I am wondering is how about LSALT? if you turned off your route in an area with high LSALT continuing on that particular heading, you won't have the proper LSALT to protect yourself.

saying TCAS RA, rather then TCAS climb/descent. I believe is to reduce confusion if you initially said TCAS Climb, but then the system revised it and then you have to make a descent instead... rather then saying descent to ATC. The initial TCAS RA just make it clear to the ATC you are following TCAS of whatever it is telling you to do.

BOAC
12th Apr 2009, 12:47
In my opinion, if you have an instructor who says it should be done his way, do it his way, otherwise do it how you think right! - this of course ONLY applies in the sim or on a training trip (unless you are brave enough to disagree with the trainer...)

On the line, do it the way 'kijangnim' says because nobody else around you (and trying to get out of your way) will know what your faddy instructor told you to do!

BelArgUSA
12th Apr 2009, 12:51
Hola ricfly -
xxx
No matter how good a simulator is, it remains a training device.
And the instructor tells you what he expects you to do.
If he wants an emergency descent wings level... do as he tells you.
xxx
Like you, I would bank (say 45) to reduce negative Gs... in real life.
And get off the airway.
Planes are close to be exactly on top of each other.
Thanks to our modern navigation systems, INS coupled to GPS...
That is what I observed these last years on oceanic routes.
In the old days, they would be close to a mile to the left or right.
xxx
RTO - do exactly as the SOPs or instructor says.
In real life, there might be other considerations for RTO.
You could have to combine SOPs and common sense.
Do not give yourself a headache in simulators. It is training environment.
xxx
:ok:
Happy contrails

Willie Everlearn
12th Apr 2009, 14:42
As a sim instructor, I prefer in some instances where things aren't so cut and dried, that YOU tell me what YOU would do. Then I, as your instructor, can decide whether or not what you did or intended to do is according to the aircraft manufacturers' recommended procedure, consistent with published regulation, safe, wise and defendable. Remember, instructors should also be facilitators not always dictators.

Also, not all SOPs can apply in a non-standard environment or circumstance. Not all rules/regs are compatible with every situation. Yet, most line pilots will try to strictly adhere to SOPs when declaring an Emergency. Remember, the Captain has full authority during such times. It is also acknowledged in most ANOs/Regs/SOPs, etc., as to who has the final authority. Whilst I fully appreciate my comments may be misinterpreted, I centainly hope you understand I'm not advocating that you can do anything. You can do anything reasonable under the circumstance. It might be that individual experience levels play a greater role in what you might do versus what you would do in a real situation which is why you are better off in a sim/training environment to do it the way you would expect to do it were you in that situation.

As an IP, while it may make life easier for all of us, I personally hate a 'cooperate-graduate' attitude. We're supposed to be professionals, so speak up when you feel the need. Especially where the IP is incorrect or may be misinformed. Defend yourself and get into an intelligent exchange with your instructor. We don't know everything! A good one will discuss it. Admit when he's wrong whilst a bad one might cut you off. If you have a sound reason for doing something in a particular way, stand up for yourself. Should you one day find yourself in front of the NTSB/CASB/AIB, Fleet Manager, CEO, defending yourself is good practice.

Willie :ok:

mustafagander
13th Apr 2009, 07:05
I think a turn off the airway at the start of an emergency descent is necessary. My reasoning is that the turn reduces the risk of galley carts floating about and it gets you away from the very accurately navigated traffic below you on the airway. Turning back to parallel track about 5 miles or so displaced also keeps your LSALTs etc valid.

BUT if the instructor is set in his ways, go along with him and pass - that's what we're all in the sim to do.

AerocatS2A
13th Apr 2009, 08:30
So, Boeing wants me to consider turning a B744 in the middle of a 60, or worse, 45m RWY for to avoid wind blowing a fire towards the fuselage. The distance from the engines to the fuselage is considerable for an eng. fire flame to reach it. As I can't ask Boeing why, I ask the world best pliots in PPRuNe.
Yes, they want you to consider turning in the middle of a runway. After you've considered it you can decide whether it is the best thing to do or not. If there is a taxiway placed in a convenient position, you could turn on to that, if there is no room to manoeuvre, then keep the centreline. Just because they suggest you "consider" something doesn't mean you have to do it.

testpanel
13th Apr 2009, 19:35
In my opinion, if you have an instructor who says it should be done his way, do it his way, otherwise do it how you think right!


And the instructor tells you what he expects you to do.
If he wants an emergency descent wings level... do as he tells you.
xxx


It is training environment.
xxx


Could be checking as well!

BUT if the instructor is set in his ways, go along with him and pass - that's what we're all in the sim to do.

So you expect an intructor or even an examiner to put his signature on "the" papers so you can go for another 6-12 months, while he/she knew you played a game on them: "pleasing the tri/tre", then go out on the line and "do your own thing". Sorry but if i meet/see those kind of people operate, they will f...k up anyway! Stick to sops AND basic airmen-ship.
A tri/tre should be flexible and willing enough to discuss the outcome and decisions made on the debriefing; if there are any open-loops he/she should consult the company about procedures (and feed back to the candidates) or the authorities on legal/law issues.

BelArgUSA
13th Apr 2009, 20:30
Hola testpanel -
xxx
For the last years I have been active here on Pprune with matters of techniques, recommendations and strict observance of SOPs and pilot nerds sitting on every chapter of their manuals as they suffer a brain's atrophy, I no longer try to give much advice. I am retired as a TRE/TRI and my chair is rocking very happily doing so.
xxx
Enjoy yourself with what I wrote here in the past about airmanship and techniques. I was the first to approve deviations when warranted. Some guys, through the years even taught me better techniques. I never invented anything, and learned many things from others, even more junior pilots. Looks like nowadays I am target of the "flak" from "both sides"... Amazing that some former "guinea pigs" and other buddies still call me occasionally to get some "tips" on how to fly a 747...
xxx
You show me a AOM/QRH that is a masterpiece and as correct as the "textual" interpretation of the Bible (as claimed by some), you will have my blessings. I personally often discussed with Boeing and other instructors from other airlines, to debate (and sometimes correct) such publications. If you have other opinions, I will definitely listen to you. A bank to initiate an emergency descent is among those techniques I recommend. But if your instructor tells you to do it wings level, or roll the plane upside down, just do as the idiot says. You obviously know better and agree with you, and you know how to do, in real life, rather than in the so called "training environment". My forte was always to try to make any training session as "real life" as I could simulate the sessions. And use some "humour" if need be.
xxx
:ok:
Happy contrails

Willie Everlearn
13th Apr 2009, 21:43
BelArgUSA
Good advice, and well said.

:D:D:D:D:D
Willie

Silver Spur
14th Apr 2009, 04:19
Hi,

In my outfit, its has ben changed to "TCAS RA"

Rgds
SS

A37575
14th Apr 2009, 13:24
Like you, I would bank (say 45) to reduce negative Gs... in real life.
And get off the airway

The passenger oxy lasts for 13-15 minutes. At an average rate of descent of 6000 feet per minute in an emergency descent it takes you just under six minutes to descend from 40,000 ft to 10,000 ft. Maybe eight minutes at the worst. A gentle push over is all that is needed once you decide to get going down. There is little point in going into a 45 degree angle of bank (and risk getting into an unusual attitude in IMC) just to avoid negative G when there is no hurry to descend based upon passenger oxy time limits. If you need to turn off the airway (and watch the new en route safety altitude) it would be safer in the long run to make a level turn and when on desired heading start on down. The 45 degree angle of bank caper has been around for years but it is rarely justifiable.

deltahotel
15th Apr 2009, 10:05
"TCAS RA" is the call - it says to ATC "sorry mate, all your best efforts have failed to keep us apart, my clever TCAS thingy is busy sorting things out, I'm kinda busy at the mo, when it's all over I'll let you know and then we can sort out the shambles".

Headwind - any turn towards the wind is good, vice versa for tailwind. But... wait til you've almost stopped before making the turn.

Airways - can't remember the last time I was on a centreline in europe. As soon as you get a direct routing (most of the time) you're off the centreline. A small turn will make the entry to the descent easier.

hope this helps

DH

Pilot Pete
15th Apr 2009, 21:01
Turns when initiating an emergency descent depends upon environment; On an isolated airway it can make sense. Overhead London you are just compounding your problems. We have it from LATCC that they would prefer us to stay on any assigned heading unless we have someone directly below us and MUST turn to avoid them.

As A37575 says, there is no justification for deliberately overbanking into an unusual attitude to get the descent going quicker...no need whatsoever.

The most important things to do are the recall items in your QRH and then to initiate the descent if required. Once the descent is underway a very good idea is to sqwark 7700 (that came from our LATCC liason sessions too) as you light up like a disco light on the ATC screen and they will immediately start getting other aircraft out of your way (easier for them to do if you stay on your heading). This has the added benefit of flagging you up to other sectors (possibly below) whom you are not in two way comms with. They too would be initiating help on your behalf. Remember, communication with your colleague and ATC can be quite difficult with that damned oxy mask on!

Turning on the runway in the event of a fire. Well, the theory sounds good, but in practice, in the real world when RTO has kicked in you will pull up extremely briskly. 'Consider wind direction' is just that. It doesn't mean that Boeing are telling you to make a turn before you come to a standstill. My opinion is that you are potentially wasting time by looking for this suitable taxyway to turn onto or trying to position a big aircraft across the runway. Other relevant points have already been stated such as access for fire vehicles and crews, pavement strength issues etc.

It is interesting that the Manchester 737 fire incident has been quoted. They executed a stop for a perceived burst tyre or birdstrike from 125kts. The commander told the F/O 'not to hammer the brakes', so they didn't stop as quickly as they could have. They also 'intended to clear the runway to the right'. Again, more seconds whilst still moving. 'Reverse was cancelled at 70kts' and the aircraft took '45 seconds to stop'. In my book that is quite a long time for an RTO. They had some unlucky breaks in that the wing had ruptured and fire spread quickly, the R1 door wouldn't open until 1 minute and 10 seconds after the aircraft had stopped.

They were on runway 24 with a wind of 250/7. They turned onto the Dalta link in an attempt to clear the runway, with an uncontained fire in the left engine/ wing. The last survivor, a young boy, was pulled from the overwing exit by a firefighter some 5 minutes and 30 seconds after the aircraft stopped. Time was of the essence in this incident. 55 lost their lives.

Hindsight is a wonderful thing.

Several recommendations were made, including;

1. Procedures should be developed to enable the crew to position an aircraft , when ground fire emergency exists, with the fire downwind of the fuselage.

Good idea, but non of the four airlines I have flown for have any such procedures. They assessed and decided that stopping straight ahead as quickly as possible on the runway was more suitable.

2. Research should be undertaken into methods of providing the flight deck crew with an external view of the aircraft, enabling them to assess the nature and extent of external damage and fires.

Again, good idea and easy these days, but I haven't flown a type with such a facility.

3. Operators such amend their Ops Manuals, if necesary, to direct crews on any rejected take-off or emergency landing to stop on the runway and review the situation before a decision on clearing the runway is made.

Always do this one.

Many other recommendations too, including;

4. Onboard water spray/ mist fire extinguishing systems having the capability of operating both from on-board water and from tender-fed water should be developed as a matter of urgency and introduced at the earliest opportunity on all commercial passenger carrying aircraft.

Yeah right.

So overall, I reckon pulling up expeditiously on the runway, straight ahead, and carrying out the correct drills promptly, initiating the evacuation promptly when required is the best option....just my opinion though.

PP

Gary Lager
15th Apr 2009, 21:12
I agree with you, PP - I have had sim instructors advocate both options, however I have actually performed a MTOW RTO from V1-20kt in an A321, and was stationary before I had remembered what all of my memory items were. The time available for turning a few degrees into wind, let alone for remembering which way is limited to the one or two seconds or so before the full stop, when the aircraft has speed enough to turn but not too much to cause you to leave the runway.

You can consider the wind all you like but unless you compromise the stopping performance of the aircraft (why would you?), you won't have much chance to do anything about it, if my experience is representative.

Stopping as quickly as possible and accurately diagnosing the state of the aircraft are far more important than clearing the runway or turning into/out of wind.

NigelOnDraft
15th Apr 2009, 22:51
Gary... Stopping as quickly as possible and accurately diagnosing the state of the aircraft are far more important than clearing the runway or turning into/out of wind.The issues here are derived from the British Airtours accident at MAN. In that I work for the company that effectively is that one of the time, the issue is somewhat sensitive ;)

Turning v wind, even (or particularly) with light winds, might make all the difference, and some AAIB reports have recommended such turns even for mild engine problems "as a precaution". As a result, I will allow a few seconds of delayed stopping to assess and achieve that turn if I can.

However, that is me, and my company. It would be a very unfortunate combination of circumstances that saw MAN all over again... So unless you have strong convictions, whatever guidance you have in your (company) manuals surely prevails :confused:

NoD

BOAC
15th Apr 2009, 23:21
As a result, I will allow a few seconds of delayed stopping to assess and achieve that turn if I can. - actually I don't believe there is any significant extension of stopping time or distance. All it takes is an awareness of the wind (head/tail), a confident mindset as to what you are going to do, and then a quick 'tweak' on the tiller at the last minute. NB All this based (thankfully) on sim only. The chances are you will get some sort of turn and any is better than none. As NoD says, memories are painful.

A37575
17th Apr 2009, 14:58
So overall, I reckon pulling up expeditiously on the runway, straight ahead, and carrying out the correct drills promptly, initiating the evacuation promptly when required is the best option....just my opinion though

And if it is an engine fire warning that is the cause of the rejected take off, don't use reverse thrust on the engine on fire. The stopping distance on a dry runway in the 737 with reverse on one engine is practically (ten feet) the same as with two engine reverse. In the case of the Manchester accident, the use of reverse on the engine which lost the turbine blade and which punctured the fuel tank (big fire), atomised the released fuel and increased the conflagration.

gonebutnotforgotten
17th Apr 2009, 15:06
I recall after the JL Manchester fire trying diligently in the simulator to follow the new official line about turning according to the wind after an RTO. I am sure I wasn't alone in concluding that, with Auto-RTO brakes set, the window of opportunity to turn before grinding to a halt was very small if you wanted to avoid exiting the side of the runway. To give yourself a chance of achieving the new goal you would have to get rid of the autobrake at a higher speed, but this seemed to me a poor trade off, autobrake making it so easy to steer without tap dancing on the rudder and brake pedals.

There is nothing wrong in considering the wind direction, after all the fire could occur in much less extreme circumstances, in which case, by all means pirouette as much as you like, but in an RTO, stop straight ahead as quickly as possible and don't let anything get in the way of that. The AAIB recmmendations gave an unfortunate balance; they put the turning top of the list which gave it more importance than it needed. They did mention stopping on the runway first, but it was third on the list and didn't mention 'As fast as possible'. The reissued CAA FODCOM redresses the balance a bit.