Metro Thread
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Dunnunda & Godzone
Age: 74
Posts: 4,275
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The truth is far less dramatic.........
I can't find it either!!!
Search (including our Admin section) reveals only the following Metro related D&G thread Interim Factual Report Released for VH-TFU.
I can only assume the original poster deleted his first post, thus deleting the entire thread.
Woomera
I can't find it either!!!
Search (including our Admin section) reveals only the following Metro related D&G thread Interim Factual Report Released for VH-TFU.
I can only assume the original poster deleted his first post, thus deleting the entire thread.
Woomera
I have a question, if in fact this is the thread in question.
BASI have proved the fuel guages were U/S. Is this company only required to accertain fuel on board via gauges only.
Most operations use a dual method of checking.
Are the flight crew getting a good kick up the ar$e for not considering fuel burn on the previous sector.
I have personally never flown an A/c that I couldn't accurately determine fuel burn based on previous experience on a particular sector.
Maybe the crew were new to the the Bne - thangool run?
BASI have proved the fuel guages were U/S. Is this company only required to accertain fuel on board via gauges only.
Most operations use a dual method of checking.
Are the flight crew getting a good kick up the ar$e for not considering fuel burn on the previous sector.
I have personally never flown an A/c that I couldn't accurately determine fuel burn based on previous experience on a particular sector.
Maybe the crew were new to the the Bne - thangool run?
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Dunnunda & Godzone
Age: 74
Posts: 4,275
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The original thread has disappeared.
Aviation Safety Investigation Report - Aviation Investigation Report Fairchild Industries Inc SA227-AC, VH-SEF.
Woomera
Aviation Safety Investigation Report - Aviation Investigation Report Fairchild Industries Inc SA227-AC, VH-SEF.
Woomera
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Oz
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If as the Woomera suggests above that the errant Metro thread was the one regarding SEF, then indeed there was earlier discussion that saw the originator delete their initial post. This of course, saw the entire thread disappear as a consequence.
If I remember correctly, the originator mistakenly associated SEF with another operator they had a close emotional relationship with that possibly obsured reason in their outlook (and postings).
VT
If I remember correctly, the originator mistakenly associated SEF with another operator they had a close emotional relationship with that possibly obsured reason in their outlook (and postings).
VT
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Dunnunda & Godzone
Age: 74
Posts: 4,275
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I can assure you it was not a moderator
These events drive us nuts. That is, when the thread starter, as is their right, deletes the original post. If you are going to post a new thread then think carefully about it and please be prepared for the consequences from your fellow PPRuNers.
Another Woomera
These events drive us nuts. That is, when the thread starter, as is their right, deletes the original post. If you are going to post a new thread then think carefully about it and please be prepared for the consequences from your fellow PPRuNers.
Another Woomera
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Poto & fellow ppruners,
Firstly just to clarify, I believe it was the ATSB doing the investigation into the Bundy incident...
The release that has been recently published is simply a safety recommendation to ALL Metro operators in the country, with the final report still forthcoming. So far there is nothing in the literature that places any blame on company procedures or the crew involved.
The crew knew the run well & used common practice procedures to check & determine the fuel loadings including adherence to the dual methods required by the CAO's, so no "kick in the ar$e" required I'm afraid.
And lastly, the fuel guages were allegedly giving false readings rather than being completely U/S as has been suggested in an above post.
I ask again that the ATSB & CASA be left to publish their own conclusions, without the benefit of the armchair experts offering opinions of very little substance due to the lack of the facts in their possession.
Firstly just to clarify, I believe it was the ATSB doing the investigation into the Bundy incident...
The release that has been recently published is simply a safety recommendation to ALL Metro operators in the country, with the final report still forthcoming. So far there is nothing in the literature that places any blame on company procedures or the crew involved.
The crew knew the run well & used common practice procedures to check & determine the fuel loadings including adherence to the dual methods required by the CAO's, so no "kick in the ar$e" required I'm afraid.
And lastly, the fuel guages were allegedly giving false readings rather than being completely U/S as has been suggested in an above post.
I ask again that the ATSB & CASA be left to publish their own conclusions, without the benefit of the armchair experts offering opinions of very little substance due to the lack of the facts in their possession.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Melboune
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The crew knew the run well & used common practice procedures to check & determine the fuel loadings including adherence to the dual methods required by the CAO's, so no "kick in the ar$e" required I'm afraid.
No a kick in the ass, not, a right royal blow to the left temple is indeed in order.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Here and there.
Posts: 447
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If the crew had used all 3 methods to check for quantity then this whole incident may have been avoidable. Given that the mags are of little use above 2000lbs comparing gauges to techlog would have highlighted a problem. Someone made an analogy to the swisscheese scenario earlier. I think rather than the holes lining up new ones where created. Incidently, I make no reference to the Operater of the aircraft. For mine the crew let them down, not the other way around.
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Gotta love FNQ
Posts: 86
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
While we are dealing in facts – a search of NTSB and ATSB databases can’t find one instance of fuel exhaustion in Metro 3 or 23 aircraft. For that matter there also isn’t an instance of fuel tanks exploding in Metros.
I think we can conclude that the Metro 3 or 23 fuel system does not have any major design issues – despite attempts by some to suggest otherwise.
Kwitchabitchin – did the faulty fuel gauges read within 3% of the FDL record? Did the fuel gauges continue to read erroneously consistent with the planned fuel burn?
Other than being a new phenomenon for Metros, it would be incredibly bad luck if this were the case.
The knee jerk from CASA and ATSB on this issue has caused a boot in the arse for all Metro operators and pilots. Perhaps that’s why some are inquiring as to whether the same boot has contacted the crew in question.
I think we can conclude that the Metro 3 or 23 fuel system does not have any major design issues – despite attempts by some to suggest otherwise.
Kwitchabitchin – did the faulty fuel gauges read within 3% of the FDL record? Did the fuel gauges continue to read erroneously consistent with the planned fuel burn?
Other than being a new phenomenon for Metros, it would be incredibly bad luck if this were the case.
The knee jerk from CASA and ATSB on this issue has caused a boot in the arse for all Metro operators and pilots. Perhaps that’s why some are inquiring as to whether the same boot has contacted the crew in question.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Alice Springs
Posts: 1,744
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A Metro freighter was lost in NZ not long ago due to an in flight fire at night. i think it was a fuel tank fire. (See the report)
There was an an airworthiness alert or some such, and they checked all their metros and found some with faulty fuel tank wiring.
I wonder why Australia was unaware of this matter.
There was an an airworthiness alert or some such, and they checked all their metros and found some with faulty fuel tank wiring.
I wonder why Australia was unaware of this matter.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Here and there.
Posts: 447
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jet AOK,
Tipping we might be on the same page. It happens I know but given my time on type someone has xxxxxx up. Fortunately the skipper made a good call to get the aircraft on the ground ASAP and no lives were lost. Kudos to him/her for that. Hopefully this kind of event won't happen again. I'm also human and hope that the mistakes I make won't result in a funeral. Happy New Year Guys and for your Parents and wives sake be careful and dilligent.
edited for swearing
Ethereal Woomera
Tipping we might be on the same page. It happens I know but given my time on type someone has xxxxxx up. Fortunately the skipper made a good call to get the aircraft on the ground ASAP and no lives were lost. Kudos to him/her for that. Hopefully this kind of event won't happen again. I'm also human and hope that the mistakes I make won't result in a funeral. Happy New Year Guys and for your Parents and wives sake be careful and dilligent.
edited for swearing
Ethereal Woomera
Last edited by Woomera; 7th Jan 2006 at 00:41.
Join Date: Sep 2000
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've spoken to a few pilots from Sunshine and they have confirmed that the Fuel Gauge and the Calculated fuel on board (after refuel) were within 3% for this flight. The planned fuel burn off and the fuel consumed meter also matched on arrival in TNG eg FOB BNE at Dep 1800, burn to TNG 700 (from fuel consumed indicator) ARR fuel TNG 1100 (Note these are not the fuel figures from this flight, just examples)
They have also confirmed the engineers (from a third party company based at BNE) had replaced one of the fuel gauges and carried out a fuel calibration check on the morning of this flight.
However apparently, there are two ways to calibrate the Metro fuel system, the short method (may not be 100% accurate) and the long method. It would appear the engineers used the short method in this case. The aircraft was returned to line with the fuel gauges showing a certain figure, which now has been proven to be approx 600-700 pounds in error. These same engineers “Certified” the fuel indicating system was reading correctly. They are the ones who need the “kick”.
All this talk about why the operating crew didn’t use the Mag sticks is just talk. There are aircraft in the same class as the Metro ie above 5700kg that do not have them fitted, so how do you check the fuel on these aircraft are within 3%? By the same method the PIC used on this flight. On the current high performance aircraft I fly, we never use the Mag sticks; it’s all done by calculation and crossed checked with the gauges (which on this type are reliable). For those that say the PIC should have dropped the Mags and used that for his calculation, then aren't you saying there is a problem with the fuel indicating system in the Metro? Remember the use of Mag sticks is only one of four CASA approved methods.
Reading the report it would also appear that Mag sticks can only be used if the tanks contain less than 2000 pounds, so to all you Metro experts how do you use the Mag sticks if you have more than 2000 pounds in the tanks?
Jet A,
With regard to your comment;
“While we are dealing in facts – a search of NTSB and ATSB databases can’t find one instance of fuel exhaustion in Metro 3 or 23 aircraft. For that matter there also isn’t an instance of fuel tanks exploding in Metros”
Well before the TWA800 flight no one thought there was a problem with the B747 and since then the FAA/NTSB and Boeing have found a similar problem in the B737 (which has been in service since the 60’s with 6000 built), and an AD issued that now requires operators to carry extra fuel in the centre tank to keep the fuel pumps covered with fuel.
You will also find that up until a few months back not one ATR 42/72 had an instance of fuel exhaustion, now there is one. Remember the B767 in Canada that ran our of fuel or how about a little closer to home, the ANZ B737-300 a few years back that almost became a glider (due to the wrong fuel gauges fitted) or the Bandit that ran out of fuel in Darwin on touchdown earlier this year. Or what about the Grumman Mallard, up until last week not one Grumman Mallard had lost a wing in flight, now one has.
So this maybe the first fuel incident in the Metro; the ATSB have found that with the older wiring (just like TWA800) a problem could occur ie an explosion or incorrect fuel indication (as in this incident). The ATSB have issued this warning to “PREVENT AN ACCIDENT” in the Metro. The ATSB do not issue Safety Reports everyday, I think the last one they issued was last year, after the Kingair that flew across Australia depressurised.
We operate machinery, and a lot of this machinery is getting old, as things get old problems start to occur. The Metro and numerous other regional aircraft types are getting old, so problems will occur (just tlike the TWA 800 B747, it was an older aircraft), this fuel problem could be the first of many, who knows.
Not one of us experts has seen the ATSB report into the incident, so we don’t know what (if any) mistakes the crew made on this particular flight. However this incident may prevent any current or future Metro pilot (and their passengers) from having an accident, due to fuel indication problems. Remember the role of the ATSB it’s not to point blame at anyone but prevent a reoccurrence of the same incident or accident and for all of us to learn from what has happened.
They have also confirmed the engineers (from a third party company based at BNE) had replaced one of the fuel gauges and carried out a fuel calibration check on the morning of this flight.
However apparently, there are two ways to calibrate the Metro fuel system, the short method (may not be 100% accurate) and the long method. It would appear the engineers used the short method in this case. The aircraft was returned to line with the fuel gauges showing a certain figure, which now has been proven to be approx 600-700 pounds in error. These same engineers “Certified” the fuel indicating system was reading correctly. They are the ones who need the “kick”.
All this talk about why the operating crew didn’t use the Mag sticks is just talk. There are aircraft in the same class as the Metro ie above 5700kg that do not have them fitted, so how do you check the fuel on these aircraft are within 3%? By the same method the PIC used on this flight. On the current high performance aircraft I fly, we never use the Mag sticks; it’s all done by calculation and crossed checked with the gauges (which on this type are reliable). For those that say the PIC should have dropped the Mags and used that for his calculation, then aren't you saying there is a problem with the fuel indicating system in the Metro? Remember the use of Mag sticks is only one of four CASA approved methods.
Reading the report it would also appear that Mag sticks can only be used if the tanks contain less than 2000 pounds, so to all you Metro experts how do you use the Mag sticks if you have more than 2000 pounds in the tanks?
Jet A,
With regard to your comment;
“While we are dealing in facts – a search of NTSB and ATSB databases can’t find one instance of fuel exhaustion in Metro 3 or 23 aircraft. For that matter there also isn’t an instance of fuel tanks exploding in Metros”
Well before the TWA800 flight no one thought there was a problem with the B747 and since then the FAA/NTSB and Boeing have found a similar problem in the B737 (which has been in service since the 60’s with 6000 built), and an AD issued that now requires operators to carry extra fuel in the centre tank to keep the fuel pumps covered with fuel.
You will also find that up until a few months back not one ATR 42/72 had an instance of fuel exhaustion, now there is one. Remember the B767 in Canada that ran our of fuel or how about a little closer to home, the ANZ B737-300 a few years back that almost became a glider (due to the wrong fuel gauges fitted) or the Bandit that ran out of fuel in Darwin on touchdown earlier this year. Or what about the Grumman Mallard, up until last week not one Grumman Mallard had lost a wing in flight, now one has.
So this maybe the first fuel incident in the Metro; the ATSB have found that with the older wiring (just like TWA800) a problem could occur ie an explosion or incorrect fuel indication (as in this incident). The ATSB have issued this warning to “PREVENT AN ACCIDENT” in the Metro. The ATSB do not issue Safety Reports everyday, I think the last one they issued was last year, after the Kingair that flew across Australia depressurised.
We operate machinery, and a lot of this machinery is getting old, as things get old problems start to occur. The Metro and numerous other regional aircraft types are getting old, so problems will occur (just tlike the TWA 800 B747, it was an older aircraft), this fuel problem could be the first of many, who knows.
Not one of us experts has seen the ATSB report into the incident, so we don’t know what (if any) mistakes the crew made on this particular flight. However this incident may prevent any current or future Metro pilot (and their passengers) from having an accident, due to fuel indication problems. Remember the role of the ATSB it’s not to point blame at anyone but prevent a reoccurrence of the same incident or accident and for all of us to learn from what has happened.
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Surrounding the localizer
Posts: 2,200
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
1 Post
Anyway you slice it..it was a cock-up, engineers, crew, whoever.., the travelling public dont give two-hoots about any of that..they just want a safe and cost effective service.
Hopefully lessons will be learned, steps taken yadi yardi yaaaa...
Hate the fright tube by the way..scared me silly when I flew one...(1.2 hrs in the logbook
)
swearing..and accidently bumped your smiley..sorry
Ethereal Woomera
Hopefully lessons will be learned, steps taken yadi yardi yaaaa...
Hate the fright tube by the way..scared me silly when I flew one...(1.2 hrs in the logbook
)swearing..and accidently bumped your smiley..sorry
Ethereal Woomera
Last edited by Woomera; 7th Jan 2006 at 00:43.
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Oz
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Like the saying goes
Engineer f#*%s up pilot dies.
But not in this case. Full credit to the captain and F/O whom found themselves in that unsavoury position trying to outwit the situation unfolding before them. Well done. The avoidance of disaster by the narrowest of margins in essence was miraculous.
Engineer f#*%s up pilot dies.
But not in this case. Full credit to the captain and F/O whom found themselves in that unsavoury position trying to outwit the situation unfolding before them. Well done. The avoidance of disaster by the narrowest of margins in essence was miraculous.
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Gotta love FNQ
Posts: 86
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bushy - the word on the NZ Metro is that the fire was post breakup. The focus has been on icing. The AD referred to has nothing to do with either the NZ accident or the SEF incident. It also has nothing to do with the wiring issue the ATSB has raised. Your chronology is way off.
I have never heard of a Metro fuel gauge incident where both gauges continue to operate giving a false reading consistent with the fuel burn. I am sceptical that the fuel gauge readings on arrival at TNG were consistent with the fuel totaliser. But I guess the report will clear that one up.
Jetpack - where do I start!!
I agree. They screwed the pooch as well as the crew.
The use of mag sticks is something that most operations require on a regular basis. The aircraft had just come out of maintenance on the fuel system including the replacement of a fuel gauge. Wouldn't basic common sense lead the crew to use them?
As we all know aircraft are designed with multiple layers of redundancy. Are you saying that multiple systems are designed because the first design was crap? Or that they are to give ourselves as many layers of safety so as not to kill ourselves (and others) as possible.
I understand there were numerous 747 centre tank incidents before the TWA800 flight. I stand to be corrected though.
Well I aint a Metro expert but I'll have a go. Given that mag sticks are generally used prior to fuelling there are very, very few occasions where a mag stick reading would be taken with 2000 pounds onboard. The aircraft is very rarely operated with full tanks and would almost never land with more than 2000 pounds onbaord.
I have never heard of a Metro fuel gauge incident where both gauges continue to operate giving a false reading consistent with the fuel burn. I am sceptical that the fuel gauge readings on arrival at TNG were consistent with the fuel totaliser. But I guess the report will clear that one up.
Jetpack - where do I start!!
These same engineers “Certified” the fuel indicating system was reading correctly. They are the ones who need the “kick”.
All this talk about why the operating crew didn’t use the Mag sticks is just talk.
For those that say the PIC should have dropped the Mags and used that for his calculation, then aren't you saying there is a problem with the fuel indicating system in the Metro?
Well before the TWA800 flight no one thought there was a problem with the B747
Reading the report it would also appear that Mag sticks can only be used if the tanks contain less than 2000 pounds, so to all you Metro experts how do you use the Mag sticks if you have more than 2000 pounds in the tanks?
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Here and there.
Posts: 447
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Even if the gauges did indicate 2000lbs on board I'd still drop the mags cos they will give a reading with that quantity on board. I'd have the effo drop them at every turnaround and refuel. Why wouldn't you??
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Hell...where angels ride harleys
Posts: 239
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'd have the effo drop them at every turnaround and refuel. Why wouldn't you??
Magna sticks are NOT reliable, and have a PROVEN error of about 40USG. It takes about 15 mins to do, and most , if not ALL, operators would ONLY require that the crew do a magna stick only IF there was any doubt about the amount of fuel onboard.
IF the book matches with FUEL added + Fuel used + Fuel Guages + just re certified by engineers.... WHY would you do a magna stick ?
Whay are you people so quick to want to blame pilots ? can it not be that MAYBE the engineers fcuked up ?
I reckon that the crew did well. Doesn't matter WHO xxxxxx up at 20,000', but getting it opn the deck was one HELL of a gutsy call, and correct! How easy would it have been for the captain to say " I think that the Low Pressure light / sensor may be broken.... we KNOW we have all this fuel. The guages are reading xxxlbs, and we KNOW we put on XXX lts. Disregard the light."
Well done to the crew I say.
Edited for swearing...come on guys it's not hard!
Ethereal Woomera
Last edited by Woomera; 7th Jan 2006 at 00:36.
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
JetA_OK:
You argue a good case, I'll give you that
Quote: "I have never heard of a Metro fuel gauge incident where both gauges continue to operate giving a false reading consistent with the fuel burn. I am sceptical that the fuel gauge readings on arrival at TNG were consistent with the fuel totaliser. But I guess the report will clear that one up."
This seems to be precisely what happened in this case...
I really, truly wish that I could part with a lot more information than I am here on Pprune so far, but with the investigation still underway the legalities of doing so ( not to mention possibly my job ) are on the line
Suffice to say that the information that has so far been publicly released is only an ( incomplete ) summarisation of the situation.
The comments by chief wiggum & even moreso by JetPack are well on the right track but as you said, we'll need to wait for the final official report to be published before any real discussion can take place here.
By the way, it's my understanding that most Metro operators only drop the Magna-sticks on first-of-the-day checks. It's only a small point but valid anyway... as is the fact that any fuel checks made when the aircraft is not on flat, level ground may be in error as well.
You argue a good case, I'll give you that
Quote: "I have never heard of a Metro fuel gauge incident where both gauges continue to operate giving a false reading consistent with the fuel burn. I am sceptical that the fuel gauge readings on arrival at TNG were consistent with the fuel totaliser. But I guess the report will clear that one up."
This seems to be precisely what happened in this case...
I really, truly wish that I could part with a lot more information than I am here on Pprune so far, but with the investigation still underway the legalities of doing so ( not to mention possibly my job ) are on the line
Suffice to say that the information that has so far been publicly released is only an ( incomplete ) summarisation of the situation.The comments by chief wiggum & even moreso by JetPack are well on the right track but as you said, we'll need to wait for the final official report to be published before any real discussion can take place here.
By the way, it's my understanding that most Metro operators only drop the Magna-sticks on first-of-the-day checks. It's only a small point but valid anyway... as is the fact that any fuel checks made when the aircraft is not on flat, level ground may be in error as well.