Swiss evacuates in Thessalonique [Archive]

starship

23rd Jul 2002, 00:21

A cabin crew initiated evacuation would arise from a situation which either the flightdeck could not see, a completely obvious situation or if the flightdeck were incapacitated at the time.

It is an integral part of SEP training that in the event of certain emergencies the IFD/NO.1 would initiate an evacuation without flightdeck command. The training gives quite strict guidelines as to when this should happen - as stated above in the event of

DITCHING
STRUCTURAL DAMAGE
FIRE

These are CLEARLY CATASTROPHIC events.

It would be quite normal SOP for flightdeck to state a side of the aircraft from which to evacuate. However, if they are unable to do so, (and even if they can) then this is incorporated into the cabin crew evacuation drill.

"Wait until the aircraft has come to a complete stop" - If the aircraft is taxying and smoke begins to fill the cabin through the AC vents, the Emergency in Cabin button is there for such a purpose.

"Check outside for fire/hazards" or similar would be a usual first part to a cabin crew drill after the aircraft has stopped. Therefore, any cabin crew member who opens an exit and has a slide inflate behind a burning tailpipe is NOT following their training.

Training is there to provide a good sound knowledge of SEP procedures and awareness. We all know that not every emergency will occur as per the manual (aircraft floating nicely in a ditching, evacuation into a nice flat piece of ground, gathering pax upwind away from the aircraft) hence adaptation of training and knowledge is required.

I agree that Cabin Crew initiating an evacuation whilst the aircraft is in motion, or into a fire is completely non standard procedure and either the training, or IFD needs to be questioned.

The issue of a tailpipe fire - I assume that the flightdeck should be well aware of this occurring and would initiate an evacuation if necessary stating which side to evacuate from. However if no information or command is passed (when the aircraft is stationary for instance just after pushback) and a tailpipe fire is observed for a prolonged period, does everyone sit and wait for the aircraft to become a pile of burning embers while unbeknown to the crew the captain and f/o are incapacitated or is an evacuation initiated anyway? Smoke starting to fill the cabin at the holding point?

L3 on the B757-200 - this is an exit which may be unmanned with a crewmember sitting at R3 only. Therefore, pax are briefed on its operation. Pax will open that door whatever the situation if they are told to evacuate - even if there is a tailpipe fire on the No.1 engine.

Come on guys - we are all supposed to work together - I feel that too many people clash on this point of CC initiated evacs. If the right people are doing the job, following their training and can sensibly adapt it if necassary then the safer we will all be.

However, don't always blame the crew. Blame the airlines that put an IFD on a flight with 5 other crewmembers all of whom have been recruited on a 6 month contract and have been flying for a month.......even though they are trained, the big picture may not be there.

Cheers,

starship :cool:

411A

23rd Jul 2002, 00:37

Iz

With the HK incident, the pressurisation was left in the "standby mode" and therefor upon landing did NOT automatically depressurise as it would in the "Auto" mode.

Starship

Tailpipe fires, although spectacular in appearance, do not result in the aeroplane being "burned to embers" so evac is generally not needed or desired.

starship

23rd Jul 2002, 00:56

411A, I was actually using the example loosely with the consideration that fire speading is not impossible if it is not dealt with (should there be fuel astray) .......I am not stating facts, merely points of discussion which I feel there is not enough of on these forums (point scoring and arguing - yes). I do however work for a company where CRM and shared discussion is valued to the highest degree, hence my interest in the post.

I would hardly call a tailpipe fire spectacular..........and yes I have seen one ;)

cheers

starship

Seriph

23rd Jul 2002, 06:52

This is ridiculous, some of us and our companies accept that the cabin crew have a role beyond serving lunch. The Saudi incident was caused by the flight deck, the cabin crew could have saved many lives if the pilots had operated correctly and if the procedures permitted them. Don't quibble over whether the aircraft is moving or has only got a 'tailpipe' fire, the cabin crew are usually better placed to assess the situation and advise the pilots or react as they see fit. After all the pilots could be incapacitated, un aware or just 'switched off'.

411A

23rd Jul 2002, 13:18

Seriph

<....react as they see fit.>

Surely you can't be serious. Many of the FA's I have noticed over the years did not know what time of day it was, let alone...what was 'fit".

With many carriers, the FA training just does not measure up.
Much better to leave the tech details to the tech crew.

lomapaseo

23rd Jul 2002, 18:09

The subject of tailpipe fires and passenger evacuations is covered on an instructional video put on the web by the FAA (New England Region, -Standards section)

The naration states something to the effect that the tailpipe fire as shown in the video may be spectaculor in appearence although typically slortlived when detected and handled by the flight crew (motoring and fuel cutoff). It also shows the recomemnded intercom between the cabin crew and flight crew in such events before putting passengers out the door and infront of running engines.

There have been three major events on widebodies (A330, and two B747-400) where the tailpipe fire serously damaged the wing because the pilots had to shutdown the engines and leave the fire still burning upwards under the wing using up residual fuel and no airflow to blow the fire in back of the wing, when the passengers went down the chutes without the flight crew's command.

Seriph

24th Jul 2002, 05:45

411A I was of course referring to European cabin crew. As for being switched off, well hopefully they will be sober.

deconehead

24th Jul 2002, 06:15

Seriph – “the cabin crew are usually better placed to assess the situation and advise the pilots or react as they see fit”.

I am not trying to put down cabin crew, however, there are some that do not know the right hand side of an aircraft to the left hand side of the aircraft – British Midland 737-300 kegworth.

I would have thought that communication is the key, if in a position to communicate then surely that is paramount to a satisfactory outcome to any emergency.

StressFree

24th Jul 2002, 07:06

Seriph,
There you go again...........talking pants.
411A may often be controversial but he's got huge experience and is talking good sense. Your reference to 'European' cabin crew seems to imply that they are OK whilst the rest of the World is useless. Rather a wild and rash judgment I think you'll agree, not to mention supremely arrogant. Also whats your suggestion about being sober all about - you want to be a bit more careful with your posts. I fly in Europe and wouldnt want evacuations going on without having my say so (unless of course theres something SO serious going on).
The more you post on these forums the more I'm suspect about you........................
'Tailscrape' had a good point about you the other day.

:rolleyes:

Don't Look Now

24th Jul 2002, 16:29

I seem to remember whilst working in a London airport a certain far eastern long haul aircraft experiencing a similar event after push back. A pax didn't like the look of the flames, decided he/she was better off outside the aircraft and opened a door him/herself, deployed the slide and b*ggered off!!!!(apparently only to be arrested by a couple of coppers passing by in their panda car!!!!!).

Seriph

24th Jul 2002, 20:55

So what do you 'suspect' Stressfree? It is a simple matter of fact that some airlines do authorise their cabin crew to initiate evacuations if they consider it necessary and why not? Does all the wisdom sit on the flight deck? Reading these threads I think not.

Devils Advocate

25th Jul 2002, 07:07

Uhm, one might say that as a result of CabinCrew taking unilateral action to evacuate, as a result of witnessing a tail-pipe fire (if that indeed was what it was), they rather recklessly exceeded their reemit, in as much that most airlines only allow CabinCrew to order an evacuation if the situation is quite obviously 'catastrophic' - and there's the rub....... define catastrophic ?! ( and I'm afraid to report that, as alluded to above, some 'cabin safety specialists' ;) are not clear about what is catastrophic and what is not ), e.g. and using words which mean something similar - how about: disastrous, calamitous, shattering, appalling, terrible, ruinous, tragic, cataclysmic - accordingly the definition of 'catastrophic' has been a mute point for a long time.

Now in this instance one can suppose they had not hit anything, they had not crashed, and the aircraft had not come apart, etc, so just what therefore was the justification to initiate an evacuation - was it really a 'catastrophic' situation ? Did the cabin crew really think it through, did the thought cross their mind that the flight crew might just indeed be 'working the problem' and need some time to do so, did they contact the flightdeck (whom maybe did not respond straight away because they were working the problem), or was it simply a case of blind panic ?
And before anybody says it, "yes, I do remember Manchester" - i.e. where burning fuel was pooling under the aircraft, smoke and flames were entering the cabin (which sounds kind of catastrophic to me).

Maybe a little perspective might help here too, e.g. the time from your first flying lesson to sitting in the LHS of an airliner is typically many (read, MANY) years because you need the experience and must be able to exhibit sound judgement before you're to be trusted with the lives of hundreds.
However (and I mean NO disrespect) the time it takes to train to become a No.1 / CSD / Purser with some airlines can be as quick as a few months, and you can take somebody off the street and train them to be CabinCrew in anything from 10 days to 6 weeks - and yet some people are proposing that this then provides them with the knowledge, experience and decision making skills to decide that it's better to be outside the aircraft than inside it ? Well not imho it doesn't.

Yes we are all part of a team, but there is an authority gradient and it's there for a good reason - however unfortunately (and again, imho) some have it in their head ( maybe from how they've been taught CRM and / or modern education ? ) that aboard the aircraft we are all 'equal' and that each has an equal say in how the aircraft is operated and can make decisions accordingly - wrong ! - and I can only surmise that some of the comments above promoting that CabinCrew can initiate an evacuation when it is not yet catastrophic are coming from people who have little or no real knowledge or understanding of airline(r) operations.

Plain and simple the way it should be done is that the Captain alone makes the decision to evacuate the aircraft and only in EXCEPTIONAL circumstances ( e.g. the aircraft is involved in a 'catastrophic' incident ) are the CabinCrew allowed to make the same decision off their own back.

Outside of that ( imho ) CabinCrew, engineers, ramp staff would all benefit from occasionally being included in our (six monthly) simulator refreshers - observing from the sim jumpseat - as it would then give them a chance to see that when things do go wrong (and they do) just what the timeline is between something happening, us recognising it, then resolving what to do about it, and actioning the plan ( i.e. applying DODAR ), as well as the need for accurate communications across the flight deck door ( which of course is now locked ! :rolleyes: )

411A

25th Jul 2002, 09:56

DevilsAdvocate has summed it up rather quite nicely, imho.:)

RoboAlbert

25th Jul 2002, 13:56

Gosh, I thought we in the military were meant to be backward in CRM terms.

:eek:

Devils Advocate

25th Jul 2002, 14:40

CRM = "Crew Resource Management", right ?! ( stemming from the previous Cockpit Resource Management - which was heavily orientated towards FlightDeck crew only - latterly adapted to include CabinCrew and others )

So Robo - one imagines that in the above you mean that the CabinCrew did not exhibit good CRM, i.e. being that they're part of the aircraft crew did they inform the FlightCrew that they were going to evacuate ? Were they talking on 121.6 to the fire brigade and the control tower about what the people outside the aircraft could see and were doing ? Just what coordination did they proffer towards helping coordinate the evacuation, other than telling the pax to get out ?

Perhaps to make the point, how about if when the cabin is too hot the cabin crew come in to the flight deck, help themselves to the overhead panel and start tinkering with the pneumatics and temperature controls ( and believe when I say that I have had first hand experience of that happening ! ) would you as a pilot think that was acceptable, and if not why not ? ( and I'm sure that you'll see where I'm gonna take this ;) )

Max Angle

25th Jul 2002, 16:02

Devils Advocate is quite right in his summary of the situation. Ordering an evacuation is about the biggest decision you will ever have to make in the left seat of an airliner, I can think of no circumstances in which the cabin crew should start an evacuation without first attempting to contact the Captain. If they try and fail to make contact due to a crash impact etc. then quite clearly they are on their own and must get on with what they think is best. The Swiss incident and one a few years ago in my own company clearly showed the fact that the cabin crew are not in a position to make that sort of decision in the vast majority of cases.

StressFree

25th Jul 2002, 17:16

Seriph,
I'm not going to cross swords with you - you do a good enough job of letting yourself down without me needing to help you..........
As 411A quite rightly said Devils Advocate summed it up nicely.

While we are discussing the matter however, would you care to elaborate on your comments regarding European cabin crew vs. the rest of the World? Also we are all waiting for your explanation of your reference to sobriety.
Do I need really ask why I'm suspect?

:rolleyes:

RoboAlbert

25th Jul 2002, 18:46

On the contrary Devils Advocate…

The circumstances are far from clear in the Swiss incident – and I’m the first to agree that the inherently risky process of a ground evacuation might not have been appropriate in that particular instance. I also feel that the any decision to evacuate should involve the flight deck crew.
However, what concerned me was the tone the tone of a number of postings which seem to suggests that anyone rear of the flight deck have little to offer in helping to prevent accidents. Comments such as ….

‘Some cabin crew have strange ideas’

‘Many of the FA's I have noticed over the years did not know what time of day it was, let alone...what was 'fit’’

…suggest that some people are totally dismissive of any input that their cabin crew might make.

I consider myself very lucky, the back of my aircraft is patrolled by an Air Load Master who has received training which allows him to provide a good deal of useful input during emergencies. However, we also carry Air Stewards on occasions. These guys are really there to assist during ground evacuations and although trained to do this task they are generally lacking in flying experience. However, if either of these guys comes up on intercom I’d treat what they have to say seriously. Maybe with the Air Steward I might have to work harder to ascertain the exact nature or extent of a problem but his input could still avert an accident or incident. If people persist in creating a culture where cabin crew are expected to have no thoughts beyond serving lunch then that’s all they will do and a potential source of useful inputs will be lost - and hey, maybe some aircraft too.

Few Cloudy

25th Jul 2002, 19:36

So the lesson is...? If there is an unusual occurrance and if there is time, as there was in this case, contact the cockpit crew before taking any action.

An evac occurred on a Swissair MD-80 in CDG during pushback - much to the surprise of the cockpit crew - due to smoke from a ground vehicle entering the cabin and setting off the rear toilet smoke alarm, which was similar sounding to the evac signal fitted at that time.

Following that incident, the books were revised as to definition of when the cabin crew could initiate an evac. on ground - including the stipulation that the aircraft stand still, as well as the catastrophic points (ditching, severe damage and explosive fire) mentioned above. At that time the tailpipe fire was even taught as an example for not evacuating.

Time passes, people change and history repeats itself unfortunately.

Final 3 Greens

25th Jul 2002, 20:56

I get a bit worried when I read some of the posts frm CC on this forum.

I have a PPL, several hundred hours and over 20 hours in seriously run jet sim sessions, including simmed engine fires etc.

Also, I have flown regularly ince 1976, logging thousands of hours as pax and seeing a few "unusual " occurences.

In the back of a airliner, unless the wing was ablaze to an extent where it was about to fall off, I would find it very difficult to judge whether an evacuation was required - I simply do not have the level of training, systems understanding or experience.

With the very greatest of respect to CC, whom I respect for their knowledge of cabin procedures and generally very professional approach, I doubt that they would be in a better position than I.

So it seems, from the perspective of this regular SLF (and thus some part contributor to airline coffers), that the command authority should reside in the flightdeck with the people who are trained on the systems and have the experience to make the right decisions.

This is in no way meant to demean CC, who have an important part to play in the team, especially in feedng information to flightdeck, but it seems to me that as a rule of thumb that the captain should make the calls about evacuations.

hobie

25th Jul 2002, 21:37

A summary on this incident is noted in the following link ...

http://www.airdisaster.com/special/special-sa163.shtml

411A

26th Jul 2002, 02:30

Lets face facts.

Cabin crew should stick to slinging the hash, serving the necessary liquid refreshments...and stop thinking they are "in charge". If they want to be constructive, then use the interphone.

Far too many CC have in their brains(?) the thought that they "know" far more then the tech crew about "items technical".

Many I suspect are frustrated in their positions...but they will just have to "get over it". In doing so, they would make everyones duties more enjoyable.:rolleyes:

Cpt. Underpants

26th Jul 2002, 02:59

My my, you really are up on this "new fangled" CRM thang, aint ya, old fella?

Seriph

26th Jul 2002, 06:47

Yep and I bet that if he were a pax on the Saudi 1011 he would have sat quietly and burned while the cabin crew did the same because the 'Gods' up front weren't with it. 3 Greens, stick to your Cessna leave professional aviation to those who do it. Senior cabin crew are not imbeciles, they've been around awhile. Those who query my comments ao sobriety, I meant the flight deck.

Final 3 Greens

26th Jul 2002, 07:34

Seriph

You demonstrate why others on this forum treat you with little respect.

I do not fly a Cessna for your information, but you probably do not have the wit to realise that the Cessna company are the worlds largest manufacturer of business jet aircraft and therefore your childish term of derision is as misplaced as your attitude.

As for the L1011 incident, that happended in the last century and lessons were learned.

As made clear in my post, I have a high regard for cabin crew doing the job that they are trained for. I never indicated that they are imbeciles and I know from working at a major airline that many cabin crew are highly intelligent and qualified people.

sky9

26th Jul 2002, 07:58

Seriph,

Some years ago a British company wanted to make the Purser in command if the Captain was incapacitated. Luckily good sense prevailed when the CAA refused to allow it. You sound as if you come from that same school of thought. Your Profile carries no clue but your threads do.

sweety

26th Jul 2002, 15:30

God, some of you can be arrogant!:eek:

I'm so grateful I work for the company where Flight Crew actually know we have brains!

411A , I advise you rethink your post! ;)

411A

26th Jul 2002, 18:19

sweety

The regulatory authorities, the companies and the flying public KNOW who is in charge...and it ain't the cabin crew, so get used to it.

If you want tech advise, use the interphone...you know, that item on the bulkhead by the door that looks like a telephone..:rolleyes: :)

Pegasus77

26th Jul 2002, 19:05

Those FAs with brains are able to know if the plane just crashed, or if the flight crew is well able to observe and to act. Don't forget an evacuation is a procedure which usually causes a lot of injures, which can and should be prevented if possible.

The example 411A keeps referring to in several threads on the PPRUNE forum, from his own experience, shows a lot about why contact with the flight crew is important.
The diversity amongst cabin crew is gigantic, I've flown with the best professionals, but I have to admit, with the dummest on earth as well.

In the Lufthansa A320 rwy-overrun-accident in Warsaw the cabin crew initiated the evacuation, and saved the life of one cockpitmember by doing so. Those FAs used their possibility of initiating the evacuation in the right moment, namely where the flight crew both are incapacitated and there is an imminent danger to the lives on board.

If you see flames coming from an engine, while I'm in the cockpit, alive and kickin', PLEASE call us over interphone! It is possible we are not aware of flames coming from the engine, and also it is possible we are aware, but due to several reasons one single FA in the back will never be able to know from his/her position, decide not to evacuate. Maybe we want to taxi forward, maybe we already solved the problem and the fire will extinguish, maybe the fire crew is already standing next to us?

Sweety, 411A's tone in his posts might not be very friendly towards cabin crew, but the point he is making is very valid:

If they want to be constructive, then use the interphone.

P77

StressFree

26th Jul 2002, 19:14

Seriph,
Hello - is there anybody there??
Either you are a deliberate wind-up merchant or just plain stupid or both.
The utter bollo*ks you talk is quite amazing - you refer to "the gods up front" and say things like " leave professional aviation to those who do it", what planet are you from?
What exactly are you implying when referring to "flight deck sobriety".
As I said last time - Tailscrape described you very well...........airhead.

:rolleyes:

Pegasus77

26th Jul 2002, 19:24

My guess is Seriph is serving drinks all day, waiting for his moment of fame, where the flight crew is drunk (again :D ), crashes a plane and he becomes the hero of the passengers, when bravely leading them over the flamefilled apron.

RoboAlbert

27th Jul 2002, 13:20

Pegasus77, the problem isn't whether or not there should be a two-way communications flow between the front and back end, rather peoples attitudes. I would hazard a guess that if 411A treats cabin crew with little or no respect that they would be very unlikely to pick up the interphone. His sort of approach can so alienate people to the extent that they will sit, watch (and enjoy) you s***wing up and say nothing.

Sweety, I’m intrigued by you idea that 411A thinks about his posts!:D

411A

27th Jul 2002, 13:38

RoboAlbert

Brief to cabin crew (purser or supervisor):

Flight time to destination is ____, weather enroute expected is ____, if you have ANY problems that I can assist with, give a call on the interphone or visit up front personally.

Has worked for me for a very long time.

Those cockpit crew who constantly poke their noses in the cabin, are not attending to duties up front. Likewise for cabin crew.
If cabin crew want to be pilots, then go get the necessary ratings and apply accordingly.

Quite simple really.:rolleyes:

sweety

27th Jul 2002, 16:44

You see, 411A, we would, but sadly we are not as clever as you!...:(

How do you call that thing that looks like a telephone?:D

Carruthers

27th Jul 2002, 18:54

I've taken a holiday hoping upon my return to see things improve on these forums. Some hope, what an arrogant childish bunch of d--k heads you lot are. So the Cabin crew can't make decisions he! rubbish. Don't let yourselves be identified guys, otherwise don't drink the cappuchino!! Oh and if the purser, maybe 20 yrs in the trade has to speak on the phone to the F/O, maybe 1 yr, how can said F/O trust the purser to tell him what's happening such that he can make a decision!!

olivasnooze

28th Jul 2002, 04:18

So on a four engine aircraft, a cabin crew member initiates an evac because he can see flames. How do they know that the remaining engines are shut down?
Wouldn't be pleasant going down a slide into jet blast.

Carruthers

28th Jul 2002, 04:21

Nah mate, better to stay on board and get cooked.

Ignition Override

28th Jul 2002, 04:49

Have flight attendants watched the same film shown to us, where a Delta B-767 has a small tailpipe fire in one engine, and after the Captain chatted on the Rescue radio frequency with the lead Fireman, decided that it was best to leave everyone on board while some halon etc was sprayed onto it, instead of having people jump onto long slides, risking broken bones?

Are pilot groups presented with certain options and info which the flight attendant Recurrent Training syllabi might not include?

Don't forget that after 9/11, an FA on a DC-10 which was loaded with people looking forward to their flight to Amsterdam, became anxious when she overheard people with foreign accents, used her cell phone to call her boyfriend far away and decided to use him to call Wash Dulles Airport Security while she, alone, initiated an evacuation without telling the pilots!

Final 3 Greens

28th Jul 2002, 06:56

Olivasnooze

... to say nothing of dumping a load of scared and confused pax on an unfamiliar apron/taxiway without a reception commitee and with the likelihood that the fire service and other ground vehicles would be approaching the area at a rate of knots.

Whiskey Zulu

28th Jul 2002, 09:06

Our cabin crew are taught that after an aircraft has come to a stop they are go to their assigned exit, assess external conditions for fire, etc and 'WAIT' for the evacuation command from the Flight deck crew. It is emphasised to the c/c that the time taken to complete shut down checks may vary between different a/c types and that they are to use crowd control techniques in order to prevent pax pressurising them into evacuating prematurely, or attempting to open the exits themselves, before the engines are shut down.

I am lead to believe that, for example, older generation boeings eg B757 take less time to complete shut down check lists than the flybywire a/c?

C/C are actively encouraged to communicate as much information as possible to the F/D during ANY emergency situation. Any C/C member initiating an evacuation without attempting to contact the Cpt would be diverting from SOP's. One can however never say never and a get out clause is provided. ALL aircrew 'may modify standard procedures for the best safety advantage.' But they had better be able to justify the reasons afterwards!

411, whilst agreeing with the theortical side of your argument, I also agree with others that your approach to CRM leaves a lot to be desired. It pains me to say that you remind me of the Cpt at Kegworth (Hunt?) who was so unapproachable the c/c apparently would not have dared to question that he knew which engine was on fire? CRM has been developed specifically to address problems and attitudes such as this/yours. No doubt, with your usual 'candour' your rebuttal will be swift, well worded and patronising to the extreme. It changes not the fact that, though you appear to think otherwise, yet another window has been smashed in that glass house of yours. :p

Pegasus77

28th Jul 2002, 11:39

Dear Caruthers,

I agree with most people here on the forum that the tone of 411A is not always the most tactical (he seems to like being disliked, which is not a good thing for a captain), but how about the threat with cappucino a few posts up?

No valid point was made there, although offcourse a 20 year purser knows a lot of flight safety and a lot of the service in the cabin, a purser didn't follow flight training, and most important of all, the purser is not in the cockpit, where all the information (gauges, indications, radiocalls with tower and fire brigade to mention some) comes together. There the 1 year FO has, because of his training, and because of all the information sources presented to him, a better overview of the total picture. Please let said purser call the FO with information about how the passengers are doing, about where flames can be seen from the cabin, but as long as the cockpit is not unconcious, may the pilots make the decision?

I don't think Olivasnooze wanted all pax in his example to be cooked on board, my wild guess is he doesn't want them roasted or grilled on the apron.

I understand your feelings, at least for a part, Caruthers, but the point I read in a lot of posts of pilots in this thread is that FAs might be very competent, but have limited information sources and therefore should seek contact with the cockpit if they wish to evacuate. Reasons for that are several (fire brigade, nescessity of evac, running engines, direction of the wind etc. etc.). I am the last person to state cabin crew would not be able to make a decision, but in this case, you should decide to wait or to provide the cockpit with information you only can provide from the back of the a/c.

P77

411A

28th Jul 2002, 15:44

Whiskey Zulu

During a pax flight deck visit many years ago (when this was indeed possible) the guest mentioned that the IFS was telling everyone within earshot that "he was in charge" of the flight.
Called this IFS up front and asked him if he knew where the nose of the aeroplane was. He replied...yes, of course. Had him look over the glareshield to be sure. Then asked him if he knew where the white light was at the tail. He again mentioned "of course".
My reply was...."Between these two places, everything belongs to me, the rest belongs to you. Now get your a@@ back in the cabin and do YOUR job."

Thereafter, not a peep out of him.:p

Pegasus77

28th Jul 2002, 16:13

411A, like I said, you seem to like to be disliked, and after your last post I do not like you, so you can rejoice and be happy about this last event you mentioned in your hotelroom alone at night, during which the rest of the crew is having dinner together.

P77

Whiskey Zulu

28th Jul 2002, 16:53

Seems I was wrong after all.

No doubt, with your usual 'candour' your rebuttal will be swift, well worded and patronising to the extreme.

It seems even 411A can't defend his personal attitude to CRM.

You are a flight safety hazard. :p

Seriph

28th Jul 2002, 19:08

We are going around the usual circles guys. It would seem that the issue must be black or white. In the majority of cases the flight deck would initiate an evacuation but they are at the end that impacts first and may not respond to 'phone calls'. It cannot be beyond the wit of even 411A to see that there will be circumstances when the cabin crew should initiate an evacuation, they may occasionaly get it wrong but who doesn't. Pegasus77, please get real. 411A, bearing in mind that you are now locked away in your flight deck who do you think is in charge of the cabin? get out of your ivory tower.

Devils Advocate

28th Jul 2002, 19:20

But perhaps (in a roundabout kind of way) 411A has ( or at least tries to make ) a valid point, i.e. it's all very well being 'civil, nice and egalitarian', but sometimes 'civil, nice and egalitarian' is not what's needed.

E.g. Just imagine Boot Camp and a RSM to a trooper on some point of who's in charge ( and why )....

"Now look here my good man, would you please remember that whilst we do try to be nice and chummy and all that, but, well, it's me who ultimately carries-the-can, so do please try to bear that in mind in your deliberations"

Where at the other end of the scale is........

"You 'orrible little man, just who the bloody hell do you think you are ?!!!"

Perchance to jest,........ where of course somewhere in between there's hopefully a happy middle ground for all occasions, and especially so to be hoped-for in the tight confines of an airliner and it's team therein.

But let's not also forget that sometimes a COMMANDER (hence the title) has to make decisions which might prove unpopular with the troops (read, 'team'), and hence to then suffer perhaps "the loneliness of command !"

E.g. W.r.t. to 'Aircraft Commanders discretion to extend a flying duty period' as written in many a JAR Ops Manual (section 7) it often states: "Aircraft commanders may, at their discretion, and after taking note of the circumstances of the other members of the crew, extend a FDP beyond that permitted in paragraph..... blah blah blah " - i.e. theoretically the decision to extend a FDP has got nothing to do with the Cabin crew team ( but you'd be amazed how many CabinCrew think that they can hold the operation to ransom about that ).
Or how about, "Commanders are authorised to exercise their discretion in the following circumstances, ....... blah blah blah " where your average FltOps Manual is liberally littered with such phrases - but it doesn't say anywhere that the Purser, CSD, or CC are able to exercise such privileges.

Of course some of history's best commanders have been aloof from their troops, yet still much admired and invoked much followership, and vice versa (and vice versa) - it takes all sorts ;) - and if by any other yard-stick, aircraft commanders get paid a reasonable salary as a sort of a measure of their experience, level headedness, decision making skills, and responsibility required that comes with their job.

That said, and rather unfortunately ( imho ), many cabin crew are not aware of the level of knowledge, skill, and experience of the person in the LHS - coz all they mostly see is a couple of boring old sods sitting up front for hours on end, expecting tea and food on a regular basis, and apparently not doing too much at all except to watch the AutoPilot do its stuff (yet earning a stack more dosh) - but not for them the biannual sim checks and medicals upon which the license and livelihood depends that you pass !

Indeed it made me chuckle the other day when the AP on my aircraft slightly lost the plot during a descending turn (changes from VNAV SPEED, to LVL CHG, to V/S) and induced about 7 seconds-worth of light G-force; I was earwigging the 'Cabin Interphone' (as you do) which then burst into life between front and rear galleys as to what the hell was going on ( talk about sh!te' themselves over a modicum of G -force - whereas I actually quite enjoyed it, as it reminded me that I was flying) where I then jumped in and said that it was all ok, which it was - and yet some here would purport that I'm supposed to feel confident that the team members behind me are always knowledgeable enough aviation professionals as to be able to initiate an evacuation based solely on what they are experiencing, rather than the coordinated information that's coming into the cockpit via Cabin Interphone, Instrument Readings, RT from Tower and FireBrigade, 'the bigger picture', etc..... ?!

So, very much in concurrence with what has been said above, ideally the CabinCrew should inform the FlightDeck of what they see, so that all the information can be assimilated such that a coordinated decision can be made (ultimately by the Commander) as to what is the best course of action to follow (i.e. to get out or not).
Of course if the situation is 'Catastrophic' (define) then the CabinCrew are very much on their own.

Ps - (hence the Edit - actually for a typo, but also for an addendum) I'd just like to add that many is the time when I go to work and think "Wow - what a top team !" and that when we all blast off into the atmosphere we go with TOTAL confidence in one another, in that each knows their part in the play and yet that they can assume other roles if need be - but there again, just occassionally it's not the A team that's onboard (when viewed from any angle) ;) and it's then that all aboard need to pay particular adherence to the script (read, SOP).

Seriph

28th Jul 2002, 21:16

What a load of c--p.

411A

28th Jul 2002, 21:27

Seems "some" here still do NOT get the picture.

The Commander IS in charge, like it or NOT. I could care less if i'm not popular...don't answer to the CC, but management (actually AM management now, so make that shareholders).

OTOH, the very best flights are when there is a "cabin captain" available in the cabin who can have all work together with no problems. To these.... my utmost respect and co-operation.
Have bought many a beer for these folks...but unfortunately these types are few and far between.

Over...:p ;)

PS: Seriph has clearly lost the plot, as the Brits would say.:cool:

Captain Stable

28th Jul 2002, 22:19

A little less name-calling here would be well-received. :(

I was always taught that in cases of catastrophic failure, the cabin crew can initiate an evacuation.

Such situations include (inter alia) ditching, forced landing and fire in the cabin. It does not include a tailpipe fire.

Should the Purser/CSD/#1 suspect catastrophic failure, first action should be to contact the flight deck. The normal "three calls" rule would apply, I suggest. If the FD crew are a tad busy they can just say "Yeah - we're handling it - standby".

The cabin crew should only initiate an evacuation in such cases if they have reasonable cause to suspect that all up front are incapacitated.

In case of a problem, it is thoroughly dangerous for everybody to start taking action and making decisions affecting the lives of a couple of hundred pax without maintaining the best standard possible of CRM - and that means communicating. Such communication appears from what I've seen to have been sadly lacking in the reported case. However, I accept that the full story will not have been told yet.

Devils Advocate

28th Jul 2002, 22:41

Seriph........... I, or I'm sure (imho) many of us, do not understand why you seem to find the contents of an Airlines Ops manual such anathema ( it's a legally binding tome; i.e. containing details about which you can be veritably hung drawn and quartered ), and accordingly might I suggest you have a VERY GOOD READ of your own companies one (start with 'Part A' - Section 1 - in which you'll find somthing akin to 'Authorities, Duties and Responsibilities of the Commander' ), especially those sections which pertain to who is responsible for what, where, and when - because one day you might need to be able to defend both your actions and that of your crew ( should either you or they vary from what is permitted within it and or its scope ).

Indeed you might indeed find that, following the section mentioned above, there is something relating to 'The Duties and Responsibilities of Other Crew Members' (but not the F/O - but whom is governed by similar dictates) stating something similar to: 'Other crew memvers are responsible to the aeroplane commander and shall carry out his / her instructions and assist him / her in the safe operation of the aeroplane'

So read it and weep old son - it's black and white (sort of) and legally binding - ignore it or misunderstand it at your peril !

Final 3 Greens

28th Jul 2002, 23:29

Serif

Try and understand this .....

An aeroplane is neither a democracy nor a meritocracy.

The Captain is responsible for the safety of the aircraft and pax and his/her authority/culpability is final.

This rule applies whether the aircraft is a Cessna 150 or a Boeing 747-400.

A passengers role is to listen to the instructions from the captain, usually delegated via the cabin crew and to comply.

The role of cabin crew is to listen to the captain (or FO if the captain is incapacitated) and comply, but also to offer information where appropriate; also under some exceptional circumstances (e.g. where flight deck incapacitated after an emergency landing) to take the necessary action using own initiative - but note the word is exceptional.

Before you get on your high horse about "leave professional flying to those who do it professionally", please note that air law is the same for all pilots and I have a CAA exam pass in it - do you?

Now if you ever come across me in your professional role, I will be the quiet and courteous guy in seat XX, who listens to the safety brief, follows the crew's instructions and is generally low key.

Its all about trusting the chain of command and although I don't often agree with 411A's tone, if he is the captain of the a/c I'm travelling on, then he' "The Man" as far as I am concerned and he owns the bat and ball. He also seems to have acquired a lot of hours, with the same number of take offs and landings - this is a very good sign in my limited experience.

If Sh*t happens, then decisions have to be made by however is capable of making them, but for the vast majority of the time, the guys up front will have better situational awareness (including input from cabin crew.)

This shouldn't be a contentious or emotional discussion, it's logical and if you look at the safety stats, it works.

Ignition Override

29th Jul 2002, 00:00

Even when pilots' remarks on Pprune about previous inflight discussions appear quite blunt or abrasive, the written word often lacks the ability to describe what the situation was. I have heard about one or two gate agents, who stated that they were in charge of the aircraft at the gate. Well, most of us, if present to overhear such a remark, might just leave the agent in his/her own little phantasy world. The Captain is usually told that we can't delay for lav service etc unless there is a safety issue.

When the airplane leaves the gate, not even such a "Gate Captain" has anymore authority or "responsibility for the aircraft" :). No flight attendant has this much responsibility, but we had better hope that any of them tell us of any concerns or suspicions, regarding odd smells, sounds, leaks etc or passenger behavior, not to mention scanning an engine (plus listening to a tail-mounted engine) if there is a known problem.
We ferried a plane once, years ago, which had a left engine sounding more like a loud vacuum cleaner (or an A-10/C-5 engine), from BOS to the ATL hangar. It was not grounded until the noise became loud enough such that passengers/crewmembers to complain about it.

sweety

29th Jul 2002, 09:53

I am sure that most of us, if not all, know very well that the Captain and FO are in charge of the AC. We know their decision is final. I recpect Flight Crew and I know how hard their work is. (Maybe the fact I'm married to one of them helps?) Anyway...

My guess is that Cabin Crew panicked and thought the best thing was to evacuate. Everybody makes mistakes - even pilots!. There is no need to be rude to Cabin Crew.
Am I right saying there were no casualties involved? I'm not criticizing Pilots, but how many crashes have we had because of Pilot's fault?

I just felt some of you have been trying too hard to prove how important and powerful Flight Crew are and unproffesional and inexperienced are Cabin Crew. Didn't think it was fare. Flight Crew work hard to get where they are, they also are paid more money to be responsible etc.. I agree there are many Cabin Crew who don't have a lot of experience - that's why incidents like this happen. They come and go - not many of us make this job a career... I'm sure you all knew all that before you read my post anyway...

;)

773829

29th Jul 2002, 13:00

I agree to most of the above entries, but still there are rules, aswell for F/A's to be followed.

And in our SWISS manuals its is clearly written. that there are ONLY 3 cases, where an F/A is allowed to initiate a emergency evacuation on here/his own and this are "ditching, structual damage and EXPLOSIVE FIRE".

What an explosive fire looks like is regulary discussed in our EPR (emerg. proc. refresher) If a F/A thinks an engine tail pipe fire is an explosive fire, there was somewhere a gap in avation education!

HugMonster

29th Jul 2002, 13:20

Quite right, 773.

But even then the Cabin Crew should only take unilateral action if the Flight Deck crew are incapacitated.

First rule should be they check. CRM is everything in emergencies. Without it people are going to die unnecessarily. Three words of guidance here:- Communicate Communicate, and CommunicateThey should not be initiating an evacuation without checking first with the Flight Deck to see whether or not they are incapacitated.

Nor should they do so when the aircraft is in motion, nor on the side of the aircraft on which the fire is!

The #1 did not follow procedures, did not follow common sense or logic, did not communicate and in doing so turned a minor incident into a major peril for all on board the aircraft. Perhaps (s)he should be spending a little more time in the garden...

Whiskey Zulu

29th Jul 2002, 16:07

Quote: Hugmonster

'nor on the side of the aircraft on which the fire is!'

In theory it is considered unwise to evacuate on the same side as an external fire. In practice there are other factors that need to be taken into consideration. The British Airtours disaster at Manchester clearly showed that exits on the same side as a fire should not be automatically disregarded. This theory delayed the use of the FWD port exit and no doubt cost lives. The only technically operable exit would have been the starboard overwing exit, which wasn't even controlled by c/c.

On 8 exit a/c such as B757/747/A330/A300, etc. the distance between the FWD/AFT doors and the engines is considerable. Although the tendency for fire/smoke to effect the rear doors is greater than the fwd doors, it is the crew member at the door on the day that should decide whether the exit is usable or not once the command to evac has been given.

Agree?

HugMonster

29th Jul 2002, 16:13

Certainly agreed that different aircraft have different considerations. Normally, however, one would tend to avoid the side on which one is more likely to get burnt to a crisp ;)

nojacketsrequired

29th Jul 2002, 18:09

Well 411A ,
I do not know what your problem is with cabin crew
but you are well up your own ar*e.

I am an ICCM and fully understand the chain of command on an aircraft and respect the responsibility that the flight crew hold
in an emergency and how your training and skills can save live's.
But please do not under estimate the ability of 'YOUR CREW' in
having to make a decision and to evacuate and save people.

It is very clear 'clearly catastrophic' or 'ditching' but when is 'catastrophic'?.
If we don't get the signal to evacuate due to the fact you may be dead and the aircraft is covered in flames are we going to sit there and wait .....NO.

Yes the best form of communication is via the interphone and yes we know what it is and where it is to be found (despite your arrogant statement)but sometimes crew may judge it catastrophic
and initiate the evacuation and save people.

I find your postings arrogant to put it mildly and your disrespect of crew sad.
You got your job as a pilot for the skills you hold and require to handle an aircraft and we the cabin crew for our ability to react in an emergency , interact with passengers and our personalities.
As the last of these you do not have I hope I never have to meet you on or off an aircraft and I am so happy your skills keep you on the flight deck because with your attitude if you ever got in the cabin we would never see our passengers again!!!.

I have no doubt that you would never make these statements in front of the crew as your postings are shielded by this forum and you want the crew to look after you.

If you have any bottle please introduce yourself by name and then say ''some of you may know me as 411A'' and I hope one of them is me.

Devil's Advocate....You are very correct that some crew only get 10 days to 6 weeks training but experience comes with time and so do judgements.
In your early days as a pilot certain situations may have been outside your operating capabilities but now you can handle them.

To both of you please treat others with the respect you would like yourselves and the job can still br fun. :D

NJR. Bacardi Coke loads of ice and lemon.

P.S. 411A have you ever been dumped by a hostie or have you never had the personality to pull one!! and are you the first out of the taxi and last to the bar.
I think you need to make your's a large one!!!!!

Shadowpurser

29th Jul 2002, 19:20

Hey NJR!!!

Welcome to the world of PPRUNE!

I've been involved in a thread like this before (look up BA policy on upgrades - TERMS AND ENDEARMENT) and when it comes to being in charge some of these guys on here like to ram it down your throat with there caps on until you can't see the four stripes on their arms!

They are the people that tell everyone they are captains at parties and CRM for them starts and ends with the words "I'm in charge!".

When you guys get windows or video cameras that show you whats going onbehind you outside the aircraft then we'll be happy to let you decide when to evacuate. UNTIL THEN it's still up to us to decide if flames in an engine are catastrophic or not. We are not shown or told about any flames that could appear in an engine other than if you see them and it looks like it's all going Pete Tong YOU EVACUATE!! No arguements! So there could be a reason for flames to appear in an engine and not cause a problem - but could they not spread? - and could they present a risk to your PAX? If after checking them out the answer is yes EVACUATE! I'm employed to save lives primarily, mine and my crews - my PAX - and the pilots. I don't intend to have any of those groups on my concience should something happen, and looking back a few seconds of uncertainty could have made all the difference.

We did a scenario on my CRm course the other day based on an Air Canada incident with fire on board. PEOPLE DIED! Due to in-action and uncertainty I REST MY CASE!

Devils Advocate

29th Jul 2002, 19:54

nojacketsrequired - please have a 'careful' (re)read of what I've posted above.

In that I would propose that me, like you, are only too aware that in the 'early days' of ones aeronautical career one's knowledge is often lacking to the extent that one needs to be able to 'hang ones hat' ( so to speak ) on the training that one has received and to fall-back on the guidance and experience of those around you.

Of course in the F/O’s case, they learn from hands-on and from the example and experience of the people who occupy the LHS – and whilst the learning curve is initially VERY steep the whole of the apprenticeship last for years and years and years !

E.g The pilots have to undergo an extensive period of training to even be allowed to apply for an airline job ( i.e. a minimum of one year full-time training, costing from £40,000 upwards – with NO guarantee of employment at the end of it ).
But once (hopefully) in the bosom of airline employment ( and where dickheads are discouraged ;) ), they then have to do an aircraft specific type-rating ( 6 weeks of class room, plus 2 to 3 weeks of simulator training with assessments and tests all along the way.
Should they pass that, they then have to do ‘base training’ in an empty aircraft ( their first flight in the real aircraft ).
If they pass that they can then visit the CAA, if only to give them a stack of cash, to have the aircraft type put on their license.
After that they are then into ‘Line Training’ which might be a minimum of 40 sectors, where during the first 6, 8, or 10 plus of which they have a safety pilot on board, after which they are still only allowed to fly with Training Captains.
Once they’ve passed their Line Training Check they are then likely to be ‘black-dotted’ to signify their lack of experience until some predetermined level is achieved, e.g. one hundred hours (or more) on the aircraft type.
And of course every six months the pilots are put through their paces in the simulator ( as well as the Class 1 Medical) as part of keeping their license ( and therefore livelihood ) intact - so no pressure !

Thus from the time of starting-out until they occupy the LHS and Command of an airliner is many (read, Many) years – and it is not always an easy apprentiship, and it is similarly not a God given right that a F/O gets to become a Captain....... and of course that is why (when you say) In your early days as a pilot certain situations may have been outside your operating capabilities but now you can handle them that the Captain is there - of course should the skipper croak-it the F/O should at least (on the balance of probabilities) be able to safely land the aircraft at the nearest suitable airport.

Flightdeck training and career progression aside, I personally try hard to treat every crew member as part of the team, where I genuinely believe that ‘open and honest’ is nearly always the best policy, and where I always encourage ALL the cabin crew to come a visit us in the FlighDeck to say “Hi” – though it’s disheartening to find that very few can be bothered ( though it’s seemingly often the No.1 that puts the mockers on it for them ) - and I always remind the CabinCrew that they’ll have our full support if they don’t like something in the cabin, and / or that no matter how trivial it might seem that we’d rather hear about than not - and also, for it what it’s worth ( normally quite a lot – ouch ! ) I always stand the Cabin Crew all their drinks down-route ( after all I do normally earn a lot more than they do – and it’s my way of sort of saying ‘thanks’ ), and so in general I normally think a LOT of all my crew and I find it quite hurtful that you might insinuate that I might think or believe something different about them as people ( albeit that you’ll hopefully agree, that there are sometimes twats on both sides of the FlightDeck door )

That said, I’ll stand by what I wrote in the previous posts about the chain-of-command.

Ps. (Just seen the post by Shadowpurser above) and w.r.t. So there could be a reason for flames to appear in an engine and not cause a problem - but could they not spread? - and could they present a risk to your PAX? If after checking them out err, just how do YOU KNOW what the risk is ? and how do YOU check them out ? – might I suggest that you too have a good read of your companies OpsManual – i.e. do ask your flight operations department and / or the flight crew to have a look at it, and read it very carefully - as it is the legally binding OpsManual which dictates pretty much everything that is expected of all the crew onboard – where failure to fully understand what it allows may one day find you in court trying to defend the indefensible !

E.g. Prosecuting barrister - “So Mr/Mrs/Miss/Ms Shadowpurser can you please tell the ladies and gentlemen of the jury by what authority you took it upon yourself to evacuate the aircraft without prior consultation with the aircraft Commander ?”

Shadowpurser

29th Jul 2002, 21:29

Because I deemed the situation to catastophic judge. That's what it says in my company S.O.P's.

Devils Advocate

29th Jul 2002, 21:44

Prosecuting barrister - "but did you attempt to contact the FlightDeck crew as to your concerns w.r.t to the apparent ‘tailpipe’ fire which you believe that you were witnessing - and if so what did they say ? and would you also be so kind as to tell the jury precisely what you understand to be the meaning of the term 'Aircraft Commander' and what it entails ? plus what does the phrase ‘CRM’ mean to you ? and can you please also define the term 'Catastrophic' as is understood by yourself in your role as a cabin crew member and where that terminology is derived from, namely the chapter and verse from your company manual(s) ?"

To be fair (hence the edit), no self respecting Barrister would ever ask all those questions above in such a singular way – more likely they’d let the accused squirm in a mire of the own making by asking each question individually and then, dependent upon the answer given, would bend their next question to suit their ends towards destroying the witnesses credibility – which in this case would not seem too hard (imho).

Shadowpurser

29th Jul 2002, 21:54

Sigh... Look! I assume were talking about this aircraft is taxiing. If someone shouts to me they see flames coming out of an engine - I go to look (I'm also thinking B737 here as well). I don't know how long a tail pipe fire lasts but I'm thinking not long? A few seconds? Enlighten me? If get get there and I find some flames that last a few seconds - YES I phone the pilots. If I get there and there are flames licking up the wings and not what I would assume is a tailpipe fire I evacuate - that's what the manual says!

If a tailpipe fire was that common or something that was not a problem - why are we not trained to spot one or recognise one? If the company thought this wasn't a serious incident and not a potential risk to all on board that doesn't require an evacuation - why are we not told about it and trained to recognise is so this doesn't happen? After all we are the ones who will see it!

Shadowpurser

29th Jul 2002, 22:03

Aircraft commander = the senior crew memeber on board (Captain -> F.O. -> SCCM)

CRM = crew rescource management
All on board crew using their collegues to their full potential and ensuring good lines of communication are open at all times to ensure the safe opperation of a flight.

Catastrophic = A situation that imeadiately threatens the lives of everyone on board the A/C

Forgot to answer these - hope these are ok;)

nojacketsrequired

29th Jul 2002, 22:03

Thank you both Shadowpurser and Devils Advocate for your response's.

S/P I stick with you on the reply to the Judge and what a turn up for the books being banged up for saving people because we didn't wait for the commander!!!!.

Devils thank you for your excellent reply and haven flown with many 'new' F/O's I fully appriciate the hard work,studies and
dedication required to become a pilot and if the Captain
became incapacitated I would have full trust in their ability.

Both trust and CRM are a two way thing and as I trust you ,you must have trust in your cabin crew.
Historically mistakes have be made in emergency situations by both flight and cabin crew as none of us are perfect..
(are we 411A).

Maybe the time has come to approach the authrities in each country to see if we can remove evacuation command switches
from any area outside the flight deck or will common sense prevail
and allow we 'the cart tarts' to use our intellect and judgement.

Just a little footnote to finish with and yes I was there to hear it!

Captain S Marmy walks into cabin to say hello.....

In conversation Captain finds out hostie has a degree from Uni

His reply 'so what's a bright girl like you doing this job for'?

I heard this and before I could butt in.........

Hostie 'because I enjoy it,it pays more than teaching and nursing
and I'm not boring enough to do your job'!!!!!!.

Captain ' Right well better get on then'.

NJR.

:D :D

Shadowpurser

29th Jul 2002, 22:34

ha ha I always say I applied to be pilot first but they told me I was over quailified!!!!

411A

29th Jul 2002, 23:51

It is the "statements" by some cabin crew here that are very worrying to many pilots (myself included).
They seem to suggest that, no matter what the Flt Ops manual says, they will "do as they like" and the Commander be damned.
Perhaps that is why some airlines (SQ for example) will employ cabin crew for rather short them contracts. In this way, not only can the airline management assure themselves of fresh new faces, but also avoid the "I'll do as I like" thinking of the more senior types. :rolleyes:

HugMonster

30th Jul 2002, 02:08

Shadowpurser, I would have had a lot more confidence in having you running my cabin had you said that your first action on confirming fire outside would have been to contact the Flight Deck.

Instead, you said if you saw flames licking up the outside you would evacuate a taxying aircraft.

Wrong, wrong, wrong.

First EVERY TIME call the flight deck.

In the scenario you posit you have no reason to suspect they are incapacitated. Therefore the captain is still in command. They may possibly be unaware of the fire. They might just be grateful to be told about it by word of mouth rather than seeing the door caption suddenly light, the slides inflate and have ATC ask them why all their pax are going walkabout on the taxyway.

Sorry, but you've lost all my confidence. You have demonstrated that you will proceed contrary to all sense and CRM and cut the aircraft commander out of the loop, acting on assumptions about problems you admit you know nothing about. That makes you a danger to all passengers you fly with.

Kaptin M

30th Jul 2002, 02:46

Reading through these posts, it`s not difficult to see how a "situation" can arise today, IN SPITE of the CRM courses we are all required to attend ( but to which a lot here obviously feel they don`t need).

We have in residence, our own Captain Bligh aka 441A who runs HIS ship as HE determines - "You may start the service once, after I switch offf the seat belt sign"..........too afraid to DELEGATE duty - even to his F/O - because he believes it would be an erosion of his authority.
BTW, there`s no point in making suggestions to 411, it`s all water off a duck`s back, as he`s been around longer than the Wright Brothers. It is Captains such as he, that made CRM a necessary addition.

Then we have our Fletcher Christians, Shadow purser and the other one or two cabin crew, who can`t wait for the opportunity to show the pax who is REALLY in charge of this aircraft.
The comment passed by their ilk on previous other threads, along the lines of "What goes on, on the other side of the cockpit door is none of the Flight crew`s business", typifies their UNSAFE, peurile psyche, unsuitable for the job they do.

It`s about team work.

Quite a few posters here ON BOTH SIDES of the cockpit door have displayed their inability to act as professional, aircraft CREW, preferring instead to try to play leading solo roles!

jet_noseover

30th Jul 2002, 03:04

411A, I can understand your point.. May not like the aproach yet your point is clear.

What I have read so far here, all appears to me as a power struggle between cockpit crew and f/as. The childlish "who is more important", "who is in charge", "who has the right"... etc.
Something does not seem right here though...

ALL of the crew is there to protect the PAX.
As a FP I know what I am doing upthere but I also need the F/As to do their job to get the "load" safetly on the ground. My approach has always been to make everyone comfortable and work as a TEAM. I expect the cabin crew to inform me of things I may not see from the cockpit, but sure as hell I'll tell the F/A to be ready for any emergency evac we may encounter from the front. For the PAX sake.
As far as I am concerned I count on the cabin crew as much as they count on me.

I need to inform them of emergency evac, the same they need to inform me of the event (and why). Prior to the occurence.

Nothing complicated.

jet_noseover

30th Jul 2002, 03:13

Kaptin M

I wish I had seen/read your post while I was "working" on mine. You'd save me the time..
:)
Regards...

mutt

30th Jul 2002, 03:37

nojacketsrequired
I will then say ''hi, I'm NJR and I suggest you only ask for a sealed bottle of water''!!!!!.

Carruthers
Don't let yourselves be identified guys, otherwise don't drink the cappuchino!!

What is this fascination with "poisoning" people? Are you fully capable of landing an airliner once the captain is incapacitated? Or do you really think that its funny to a PAX have a medical reaction to whatever you decide to put in his water?

Mutt :mad:

nojacketsrequired

30th Jul 2002, 06:59

Mutt,
The answer is no to all.No I would not poision anyone and no I cannot land an aircraft in the event of a pilot incapacitation as I am not trained to do so and I could'nt get through the door!!.

Please let me make it clear my statement was out of anger and frustration of some totally arrogant comments that to be honest I felt very derogatory towards cabin crew in the way they had been said.

I am certainly not above my station and do not get involved in power struggles with flight crew.As previously stated I fully understand and respect the chain of command as the chain of command is vital to a safe operation.

Any incharge crew member who believes they have as much power as the Capt/ F/O are living in a fantasy world.

I enjoy my job and have never even thought about becoming a pilot 1/ because I'm not bright enough and 2/ cabin crew is a great job.

I have a good working relationship with both flight and cabin crew and assure you I will keep it that way.
Apologies if the 'bottle of water' comment offended anyone
but was written in anger...sorry :( .

NJR.

BOAC

30th Jul 2002, 08:36

SP - since we are in the same operation, the following may be of use to you and your colleagues:-

Jet engines are designed to run with permanent, intense flames inside them. These flames can sometimes be seen inside an engine that is running normally from astern of the engine at night. On occasions, NORMALLY during engine start, over-fuelling can sometimes result in what is called a tail-pipe fire. Sometimes clouds of white smoke appear as the fuel is semi-burnt. The procedure to deal with this is to keep the engine running so that the excess fuel can be burnt and blown safely out of the exhaust. PLEASE ONLY ADVISE THE F/DECK if you see this. An evacuation initiated by you would result in the engine being prematurely shut down with possible disastrous consequences, the probability being that the burning fuel will impinge on part of the structure. Evacuation into running engines or from a moving aircraft (you didn't mean that, I trust??) causes tears. You cater for the time when there IS an engine fire during start-up by talking to the flight-deck if they haven't already contacted you. The Captain will decide (guided by you, of course) whether to evacuate the aircraft

Our company lay down GUIDANCE for c/crew as to what is to be considered 'catastrophic' (FCO4403 and SEP 737 11.2). There should be VERY FEW situations where c/c should ever intitiate evacuation on their own, and every option to contact the f/deck should be explored. Just about (NOT exhaustive, and disregarding post-impact) the only situation where I can see a c/c initiated evacuation as justified would be SIGNIFICANT fire with the aircraft stationary, with smoke or flames entering the cabin. As I say, though, not exhaustive.

You had better raise this with SEP on your visit next year? It seems there are a few gaps.

Kaptin M

30th Jul 2002, 09:15

Perhaps the POSITIVE side of this post has been that the cabin crew assigned to me for the next 4 days, were - this morning - given a VERY thorough briefing on Tailpipe fires, and the FACT that they are a regular occurence on some (of the older) P&W`s. :)
For sure they should advise the cockpit if they, or a pax, notice fire emanating from an engine at any time - however during ground starts, the mechanic will more than likely (hopefully) also advise the cockpit crew.
(BTW, there is NO indication in the cockpit of a tailpipe fire.)

It sometimes (more often these days) alarms me as to some of the information that is being allowed to be fed to the cabin crew. Listed below are 5 items that the airline I work for have deemed reason for the cabin crew to evacuate the aircraft WITHOUT receiving instruction from the cockpit:
(i) Aicraft fire;
(ii)Dense smoke in cabin;
(iii)Unusual aircraft attitude during take-off or landing;
(iv)Sensation of unusual sounds or impact;
(v)Leakage of fuel from the wing.

Bearing in mind that our MOST senior girls (yes, they`re ALL girls :D ) have been F/A`s for a maximum of 4 years, and the attitude of some of the cabin crew posters here who have shown that they will do what they want, mixed with the combination of poorly defined evac. "triggers" is an extra consideration that cockpit crew need to take into account, to prevent UNNECESSARY PAX EVACUATIONS.

Either way, at the inquiry, the cockpit crew is going to wear it!

"Captain, did you order the evacuation?"
"Captain, did you contact the cabin crew and tell them NOT to evacuate?"

After all, sir, under LAW YOU are legally responsible for the aircraft, and its occupants, the crew and the correct discharge of their duty!
Are you not?!!

nojacketsrequired

30th Jul 2002, 11:28

I am now finding some of the posts on this subject interesting and useful.
Thank you BOAC for the explanation on tail pipe fires and maybe examples of this type can be used in CRM to help we the cabin crew understand the aircraft a little better.

We all never stop learning so maybe a little more interaction between flight and cabin crew at CRM will help those cabin crew who may need to, define 'catastrophic' from non catastrophic.

Many thanks,

NJR.

Devils Advocate

30th Jul 2002, 16:05

.... and which is why I said some posts ago that it might help if cabin crew could come a watch what happens in the flight-deck during some of our drills, either that or viewing some well-put-together videos of what we're doing (and why) during certain scenarios - in that it hopefully would show some measure of the timeline and actions of the FlightDeck crew - e.g. there's a good video of a simulated Decompression from the pilots view point, and I'm sure that there are others covering other events .......... so anybody got any good tips on these and / or where to source them from ?

Shadowpurser

30th Jul 2002, 17:51

Well the result of this thread is that we as crew now know what tailpipe fires are. I for one now know what to look for and will not be concerned! I will bring it up with SEP not next year but imeadiately as next year may be as good as a chocolate tea pot if we get a mistaken evacuation because of this phenomenon.
I for one would like to see a video on this phenomenon so we know EXactly what to look for - and how come we have never been told about this berfore? - have we all stumbled across a gap in the SEP training? I wiil bring it up on my next visit to JB house and hopefully get an answer sometime soon.

BUT if you have issues in about how we are trained as cabin crew - BRING IT UP WITH TRAINING! we are trained the way we are trained - we all have to make a decision on the day based on the situation and if we deem in catastrophic. There are no hard and fast rules so here in lies the problem. As NJR says we are all learning every day and I've learnt here today, but if you want to clearly deffine to crew what catastrophic is then I suggest you take it up with your relevent training departments as it seems it is a grey area!

Thank you BOAC for a very constructive post (that's not meant sarcastically) - we are trained not to evacuate a moving aircraft in our drills.

AND FINALLY!!! - I AM IN NO WAY THE FLETCHER CHRISTIAN OF THE FLYING COMMUNITY!!!

As I've said in a previous thread I am in no doubt who is on charge of the aircraft and anyone who has flown with me will tell you that is exactlly the case. I am not some 55 yr old CSD earning more than the Captain and the FO put together and been around since the Wright Brothers and thinks he is THE DADDY! I am a new forward thinking young Purser who gives a monkeys about the company and his PAX and wants everything to run smoothly and safely. I do not look for every opportunity to unsurp command or do my own thing without consulting the captain, far from it. I am a true advocate of CRM and believe it to be the way forward in preventing incidents that should not happen. I am trained by the company to behave the way the company wants me to.

You can draw your own conculusions about what people are like from what they type on here.... but - I'm sorry! - until you meet them, talk to them, and work with them, YOU HAVE NO IDEA!!!

This is a forum where people express their views, opinions, ideas and feelings. Sometimes these conflict as we have people at all ends of a varied spectrum on here (411A for exampe). I'm a headstrong guy who likes to be honest with his views and opinions and not afraid to express them on here or in person, but at the same time - ready to learn. I have learnt something here and will now pass it on my my crews in my briefings.

Now here's an idea - How about I start a thread on WHAT IS CATASTROPHIC? - If we get input from all sides perhaps we can come to a happy resolution to this? From there we can go to our respective companies and get some clearer guidelines set down? Sound good?

I hope so. I'll put it in the CRM forum.

;) ;) ;) ;) ;)

Whiskey Zulu

30th Jul 2002, 18:20

WHAT IS CATASTROPHIC?

Thats easy. It's a phenomenon know as marriage. :D

lomapaseo

30th Jul 2002, 20:29

Catastrophic in the FAR/JARs is hull loss with multiple fatalities.

(25.1309) advisiory mateial

Whiskey Zulu

30th Jul 2002, 20:50

Might be a bit late then. You lot can initiate an evacuation after the hull has been lost with multiple fatalities. ;)

Wait for it, wait for it. :D

lomapaseo

30th Jul 2002, 21:22

I?m very happy to see the positive responses above from those willing to learn. In response to an earlier request from an operator who did experience an unexpected cabin evacuation in response to an engine tailpipe fire. Video footage of what these may look like were provided for a training video and incorporated in the FAA Engine & Propeller Directorate report on PSM + ICR (Propulsion System Malfunction + Inappropriate Crew Response) report found under the following link.

http://www.faa.gov/certification/aircraft/engine_special_topics.htm

The narration words used to support this video are provided below.

I?m sure that any updates to your crew training requirements will benefit from this and other similar material available from this website.

?Engine torching? or ?tailpipe fires? mostly occur during an abnormal engine start, but they may also occur after shutdown, or during other ground operations.
Although there may be no cockpit engine instrument indications, these events can be very spectacular when viewed from the ramp or cabin, and have been confused with an actual engine fire. The torching may be of short duration or it may last for several seconds. Note that the flame is confined to the tailpipe.
Flames may turn upward and threaten the wing if no airflow is maintained through the engine. And in some cases an EGT increase may be indicated on the flight deck. Simply cutting fuel flow while continuing to motor the engine normally extinguishes the flames. The flight crew depends on ground personnel to identify engine torching.
If you are told of an engine fire without any flight deck indications of a fire, follow the ?engine torching? procedure as outlined in your flight manual. This procedure will direct you to motor the engine and extinguish the flames; the regular fire procedure will not.
Do not perform the ?engine fire? procedure unless a fire warning indication occurs,
Executing the regular fire procedure may disable bleed air to the engine starter and prevent you from being able to motor the engine to blow out the tailpipe fire.
There have been cases where flight attendants or passengers have initiated evacuations due to engine torching. These unnecessary evacuations can be minimized by prompt flight deck and cabin crew coordination to provide passengers with pertinent information and to alleviate their concerns.

rainbow

30th Jul 2002, 22:56

May I say that this is a particularly informative thread for me. It has as much to say about issues of intra-aircraft attitudes, prejudices and relationships as it does (even if late) about issues technical.

I have learnt enough here about 'tailpipe fire / engine torching' to allay any fears of the 3 kids and spouse should we encounter the effect when we travel as SLF.

It seems to me that a tailpipe fire is simply the incomplete combustion of fuel. And it reminds me of our old high school chemistry classes when the Bunsen burner air supply was shut off resulting in a relatively large, wafting and somewhat harmless yellow flame.

I'm left wondering whether the nomenclature (tailpipe fire) is appropriate. It seems evocative of mayhem and disaster when in fact a normally operating turbine is a lot hotter!

Perhaps the effect could be called something else more in keeping with its benign nature. Say..'tailpipe ignition'? Any other suggestions?

In the meantime many thanks to all crew for numerous safe journeys through the skies. Heaven knows some SLF challenge professionalism, but here is a family appreciating you all. :)