Laudamotion Evacuation at Stansted

[STN Ramp Rat]

It appears that a Laudamotion A320 has put all the passengers down the chutes on to the Stansted runway after landing. no more details at this time but I am sure it will all become clear soon. obviously the airport is closed at the moment

[bucoops]

Aborted TO by the looks of things (twitter). Can't post a URL yet.

[Airbubba]

https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1080x816/d0mgauiw0aa6y43_828c6a629016846f3731f0be32c665360d951087.jpg
https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/800x656/d0mgitrxgaaajsl_dc3dbb0b985b15a0b63f604328af6a11c755fa93.jpg


https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1135x1200/d0mf9fzwoaa16fl_342c5c2e7edfacdcf3c94d759bd10c0f902b15c2.jpg

[TAY_Matt]

I saw it happen from my office window.

Huge yellow flame from the port side engine, lasted about 4 seconds, and then a large burst of white sparks, similar to when you see welding taking place, but they 'spat out' rather then fell out the back of the engine.

Looked like the aircraft moved a few feet before aborting, no real speed had built up at all.

[DublinPole]

Check out he history on FR24, did a flight on 26th, then did a non revenue service flight to Dusseldorf on 27th, went back to Vienna on non revenue flight on 1st March before starting to run in commercial service again which was the Vienna to Stansted leg.

Would be curious if some issue was identified earlier that was thought to be resolved but was not?

[DaveReidUK]

Media reports sound like a surge on No 2 engine leading to a RTO. The usual handful of minor injuries during the evac.

[uncle dickie]

AAIB have deployed a team

[tdracer]

Looked like the aircraft moved a few feet before aborting, no real speed had built up at all.

Evacuation on the runway seems rather extreme for a low speed RTO - I wonder if there was more to it than an engine surge...

[PastTense]

I thought it was rather extreme that they waited 3 hours before reopening the runway (their only one):
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/mar/01/stansted-flights-suspended-after-aborted-takeoff

[compressor stall]

Rev unlock or uncontained failure? I can't think why else only one clamshell would appear to be open.

https://cimg8.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/634x450/image_767985f6db0f4f122f660e5ed29c2595e62855fb.png
I think the top reverser door is open - hence the slightly distorted D. The lighting blends the door into the nacelle.

I guess this means that the TLs were still at REV IDLE when the masters were switched off.

[Good Business Sense]

Evacuation on the runway seems rather extreme for a low speed RTO - I wonder if there was more to it than an engine surge...
Yeh, I was wondering why too - interesting !

[cats_five]

I thought it was rather extreme that they waited 3 hours before reopening the runway (their only one):
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/mar/01/stansted-flights-suspended-after-aborted-takeoff

I don't think they were sitting doing nothing for 3 hours.

[MATELO]

I thought it was rather extreme that they waited 3 hours before reopening the runway (their only one):
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/mar/01/stansted-flights-suspended-after-aborted-takeoff

I don't think they were sitting doing nothing for 3 hours.

Given the short duration of travel time, would they have kept it closed for AAIB to have a look??

[rog747]

Saw photos shot soon after the EVAC showing scenes around the A320 and behind it, and on the runway looked like a load of bits and pieces - so did the engine cough out it's guts?

[flyfan]

There is a video on youtube in which it sounds like an engine or the APU is still running...shouldn‘t be the case if the FD initiated an Evac in my oppinion - or am I wrong here?

[austrian71]

Evac. with no fire and running engine ? - I am interested for the final report, dont wanna to spread sth around before, but I am sure Ryanair will have a detailed look into their new "baby" LaudaMotion specially after this.

[freshgasflow]

Grateful if someone here can explain to me (SLF) how can a engine surge happen during a take of roll ? After all, isn't there enough forward motion to ensure enough airflow into the engine intake ? Thank you.

[lomapaseo]

Evac. with no fire and running engine ? - I am interested for the final report, dont wanna to spread sth around before, but I am sure Ryanair will have a detailed look into their new "baby" LaudaMotion specially after this.

There is always the possibility that the cabin reported a visible engine fire (out the tailpipe) and a desire to evacuate immediately. The pilots would probably have secured the engine as soon as they stopped (EGT pegged)

I'm not sure that any of this is bad (in this case)

[Paranoid]

Of course we are not sure who initiated the Evacuation.
In some Airlines (i.e. BA) Cabin Crew can initiate an Evacuation.

[pilotmike]

Grateful if someone here can explain to me (SLF) how can a engine surge happen during a take of roll ? After all, isn't there enough forward motion to ensure enough airflow into the engine intake ? Thank you.

As take off roll (usually) starts from being on stop, initially there is no ram air except for any headwind. The ground roll, especially at low speed, is one of the most likely times for such a surge. In this case, it seems this is very much the case, from one of the earliest posts from an eye witness:
Looked like the aircraft moved a few feet before aborting, no real speed had built up at all.
So it is unclear what exactly is your point, which is worded to appear as a rhetorical question.

In this particular incident, the same witness also reported seeing:
Huge yellow flame from the port side engine, lasted about 4 seconds, and then a large burst of white sparks, similar to when you see welding taking place, but they 'spat out' rather then fell out the back of the engine. This indicates it is highly likely to have been a mechanical disintegration from within the engine, in which case any discussion about natural surges caused simply by insufficient airflow appear to be completely irrelevant.

[oceancrosser]

There is always the possibility that the cabin reported a visible engine fire (out the tailpipe) and a desire to evacuate immediately. The pilots would probably have secured the engine as soon as they stopped (EGT pegged)

I'm not sure that any of this is bad (in this case)

And yet all exits on both sides opened, despite potential fire. Some questions will be asked...

[nicolai]

Questions that should be asked include whether the cabin crew decided to evacuate on their own initiative rather than waiting for the captain to announce anything.

[DaveReidUK]

Questions that should be asked include whether the cabin crew decided to evacuate on their own initiative rather than waiting for the captain to announce anything.

Eyewitness reports re the CC weren't entirely complimentary.

https://twitter.com/ninigregori/status/1101851213220450304

[kristofera]

Rev unlock or uncontained failure? I can't think why else only one clamshell would appear to be open.


Lauda and thrust reverser issue on #1? Deja vu...

(Of course totally unrelated, I know, I know)

[rog747]

Lauda and thrust reverser issue on #1? Deja vu...

(Of course totally unrelated, I know, I know)

Yes a daft post -
Laudamotion is 3 times removed from the original Lauda Air
An A320 is not a 767
STN incident is nothing to do with a uncommanded T/R

[double_barrel]

Questions that should be asked include whether the cabin crew decided to evacuate on their own initiative rather than waiting for the captain to announce anything.

Or the passengers decided to evacuate on their own initiative rather than waiting for anyone to announce anything?

[nicolai]

Or the passengers decided to evacuate on their own initiative rather than waiting for anyone to announce anything?

At least one press report says the evacuation was commanded by the cabin crew:
One passenger described hearing a bang as his flight attempted to take off. Thomas Steer, a 24-year-old estate agent, said the plane had been accelerating for about 15 seconds before there was a “bang on the side of the aircraft, which skidded to a stop”.He said: “It was scary. And then staff shouting: ‘Evacuate, evacuate.’ My friend opened the emergency exit and we slid down the slides. A few old people fell over and the fire brigade treated them.”
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/mar/01/stansted-flights-suspended-after-aborted-takeoff

If events transpired as described, then the cabin crew ordered evacuation and the passengers then used the self-help window exits (and others) to leave the aircraft. That still leaves open questions the cockpit to cabin crew communication.

[atakacs]

Muss say this whole thing doesn't pass the smell test. Even if their procedures allow for cabin crew evac I can't really piece together how they ended up with using slides on both sides... Looking forward to that report !

[nicolai]

Meanwhile the aircraft was still parked up outside the Ryanair hangar at STN earlier this evening with some doors and the rear cargo hold open, and various ground equipment and access ramps around it. Engine reverses stowed and cowls closed.

I couldn't get a decent photo - phones always choose to ask for passcodes to delay you at most inconvenient times!

[ph-sbe]

Muss say this whole thing doesn't pass the smell test. Even if their procedures allow for cabin crew evac I can't really piece together how they ended up with using slides on both sides... Looking forward to that report !

Cabin crew evac is always allowed. Just like air crew is always allowed to declare an emergency no questions asked.

The questions will come after the fact. See also this old thread: https://www.pprune.org/archive/index.php/t-177665.html

[compressor stall]

Even if their procedures allow for cabin crew evac I can't really piece together how they ended up with using slides on both sides... Looking forward to that report !IF it is the case that Cabin Crew initiated evacuation is allowed on land in a non catastrophic circumstance, and if the engine is already shut down and not burning when they check outside, how do they know which side to go out....

[EcamSurprise]

IF it is the case that Cabin Crew initiated evacuation is allowed on land in a non catastrophic circumstance, and if the engine is already shut down and not burning when they check outside, how do they know which side to go out....

SOPs vary. My airline only allows CC to initiate if catastrophic and no contact to pilots possible. As FD we don’t state which side to evacuate or not and it’s up to the CC to determine which slides are safe to be used.

If, as in this case, the engine is shutdown and no flames visible but an evacuation still occurs then i’d expect to see all slides used.

[compressor stall]

I agree with your SOPs ECAMSuprise, its the way we do business as well.

My comment was a (maybe too veiled) dig at some previous commentators a few posts back criticising from the comfort of their keyboard the fact that slides were deployed on the failed side.

[pilot9250]

I agree with your SOPs ECAMSuprise, its the way we do business as well.

My comment was a (maybe too veiled) dig at some previous commentators a few posts back criticising from the comfort of their keyboard the fact that slides were deployed on the failed side.

I don't see the issue with all slides used.

Regardless who commanded the evac, and even after considering any advice which they must do, it is the remit of the cabin crew to assess the suitability of each individual exit, isn't it?

[Yaw String]

Quick survey,whilst on subject,as have just spent 15 months with a company that has no advisory contact with CC in case of rejected takeoff,apart from the evacuate command or cancel alert.
I am used to "Cabin attendants to your stations" or something similar,as a precursor to follow up commands and actions.
What is your company SOP?

[Skyjob]

Cabin crew at stations is a good call to enable CC to be aware you are in control.
However, it could also already put them into mindset that an evacuation may not be required.

For any situation where an evacuation may be required, it would be a distraction for flight crew prior to completing any checklists, therefore a no go area.
For any situation where an evacuation may not be required, it would be advantageous to let cabin crew know this using this command. It then enables them to initiate communication with flight crew, who can answer when able, and ensure flight crew are provided additional information they cannot see from their positions. An evacuation may still be required afterwards, but not based on flight deck information. rather additional information unknown to the flight crew at the time.

[EcamSurprise]

I agree with your SOPs ECAMSuprise, its the way we do business as well.

My comment was a (maybe too veiled) dig at some previous commentators a few posts back criticising from the comfort of their keyboard the fact that slides were deployed on the failed side.

I thought so, I just lazily quoted you!

Re a call to crews, we use “Attention, crew at stations!”. This gets the crew up and at their doors, awaiting an evacuation command.

Once the situation is assessed it will either be an evacuation command or “cabin crew normal
operations”.

We also use the same attention call during flight which signals to the crew that something is going on and we are working on it. Stow your trolleys and return to your seats.

[compressor stall]

Skyjob..For any situation where an evacuation may be required, it would be a distraction for flight crew prior to completing any checklists, therefore a no go area.

Que? The "Cabin Crew at Stations" call is part of the flow - at least in Airbus. It's as instinctive as putting the park brake on or ensuring the TLs are not sitting at REV IDLE :}

If I've aborted I want the Cabin crew alerted ASAP, already assessing the situations, looking out windows, eyeballing pax and foreseeing trouble. It also gives them confidence that I have it under control. I can always sit them down again later.

[LGW Vulture]

I notice those pax on the side of the runway managed to take their hand luggage items with them.

Nice to know some things don't change.

[Yaw String]

At the pointy end,in our job as energy managers,this falls under category 3,after managing energy of aircraft,and the energy of the crew.It manages the energy of the passengers.
If we come to an RTO abrupt stop,the pax are going to be full of it(energy),and its unlikely to be positive!. They will immediately look to the cabin staff for answers.
If the cabin staff stay seated in their takeoff positions,looking concerned,this could easily add to the already negative energy level amongst the pax.
However,if the pax see the cabin staff instantly responding to the calming words of Captain Roger Moore,"Cabin attendants to your stations",..and watch as they (cabin staff)check the conditions outside their responsible exits,this will add some positive energy back to the situation.
The pax will be aware that something is being done for them,and may prevent them taking things into their own hands!
Its all about the energy..ain't it!

[double_barrel]

Yaw_String. As a fully qualified, multi thousand hour passenger ;-) allow me to agree wholeheartedly. It often strikes me that the cabin crew are so outnumbered by the pax that as soon as things go beyond a certain point, control can never be recovered. eg if more than a given number start standing-up and removing bags while still taxing to the stand, the cc will never get them to get back in their seats, I have seen that happen many times. It also strikes me that the modern passenger is more aggressive and more ready to assert their right to make their own decisions in a situation they don't know that they don't understand. Any help the cabin crew can get from the front must be valuable.