Preliminary report on Cathay Pacific aircraft accident released
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Yarra
Age: 54
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Outstanding job?
OUTSTANDING job!
"During the climb, the flight crew noticed some minor Engine Pressure Ratio (EPR) fluctuations on No. 2 engine. No. 1 engine also had EPR fluctuations but within a narrower range."
Both engines had EPR fluctuations and therefore were not operating normally."At 0158 hr, when the aircraft was leveling off at Flight Level (FL) 390, the Electronic Centralised Aircraft Monitoring (ECAM) message “ENG 2 CTL SYS FAULT” was annunciated. As parameters on both engines were normal except the slight fluctuation of the EPR indications, both the flight crew and the MC were satisfied that it was safe for the flight to continue."
The EPR fluctuations continued on both engines and it appears the ECAM on engine 2 was discounted. Clearly at this point an outstanding job would have included a diversion to the nearest suitable airport."At 0316 hr, ECAM message “ENG 2 CTL SYS FAULT” reappeared. As all engines parameters remained normal except the EPR fluctuations, both the flight crew and the MC were satisfied that it was safe for the flight to continue to VHHH."
The EPR fluctuations continued on both engines and the ECAM on engine 2 was again discounted. Again at this point an outstanding job would have included a diversion to the nearest suitable airport."At 0519 hr, during the descent CPA 780 had the ECAM messages “ENG 1 CTL SYS FAULT” and “ENG 2 STALL” annunciated within a short period of time. At 0530 hr, ECAM message “ENG 1 STALL” was annunciated..."
There's nothing outstanding about ignoring problems that manifest themselves on both engines of a twin engine aircraft. There's nothing outstanding about the advice the crew received from Maintenance Control either - looks like commercial considerations were put ahead of flight safety. It is fortunate for the passengers and crew that this incident did not result in fatalities and a hull loss.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: 3rd rock from the Sun
Posts: 139
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Zygote (Google it...): Yawn. Move along now, nothing new here. Go back to MS FltSim and your virtual airline:
Wannabe Airlines Inc.
Wannabe Airlines Inc.
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bograt = some sket that is under the age of consent and is a bit ugly.
Perhaps that explains why she can't contribute to the real issues??
Perhaps that explains why she can't contribute to the real issues??
Join Date: May 2009
Location: ?
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Looks like he referenced a dictionary...that book containing words and definitions. You'll learn about it in Year 12. You've made a right fool of yourself Bograt.
Last edited by Pathos; 1st Jun 2010 at 14:14.
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Everywhere
Posts: 424
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well
I have to agree with Zygot with this one having dealt with CX operations for over a decade.
I bet the Flight Crew, knowing what they know now, would have made a different decision WRT continuing to VHHH.
I have personally had IOC MC ask to bring the aircraft back outside the MEL (no dispensation). We have all seen the same history defect in the logbook with the rectification as “C/B pulled and connections cleaned, ground check serviceable” for the same defect over the last week.
How many times has an aircraft been dispatched under the wrong MEL in order to keep the show on the road until some keen Captain has questioned someone?
On a two engine aircraft and both engines are having EPR fluctuations, how does someone in IOC MC/Pilots know it is not something more sinister. It usually does not happen to both engines at the same time, if it does, something more sinister is at work. Take the precautions and live with them. Live is the key word.
Use your superior judgment so not to use your superior skill.
Barring that, good job of getting themselves out of a difficult situation BUT it could have been avoided. It only had to take one person to break the chain of events. You decide who it should be.
I bet the Flight Crew, knowing what they know now, would have made a different decision WRT continuing to VHHH.
I have personally had IOC MC ask to bring the aircraft back outside the MEL (no dispensation). We have all seen the same history defect in the logbook with the rectification as “C/B pulled and connections cleaned, ground check serviceable” for the same defect over the last week.
How many times has an aircraft been dispatched under the wrong MEL in order to keep the show on the road until some keen Captain has questioned someone?
On a two engine aircraft and both engines are having EPR fluctuations, how does someone in IOC MC/Pilots know it is not something more sinister. It usually does not happen to both engines at the same time, if it does, something more sinister is at work. Take the precautions and live with them. Live is the key word.
Use your superior judgment so not to use your superior skill.
Barring that, good job of getting themselves out of a difficult situation BUT it could have been avoided. It only had to take one person to break the chain of events. You decide who it should be.
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 601
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mr Bloggs
I think might have been avoided would be a better call, as no-one knows what would have happened had they decided to return to SUB - maybe a similar predicament in which they eventually found themselves, only 4 hours earlier and 20 or so tonnes heavier.
Other than that, I agree with your sentiments.
STP
Barring that, good job of getting themselves out of a difficult situation BUT it could have been avoided.
Other than that, I agree with your sentiments.
STP
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 322
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think might have been avoided would be a better call, as no-one knows what would have happened had they decided to return to SUB - maybe a similar predicament in which they eventually found themselves, only 4 hours earlier and 20 or so tonnes heavier.
Good post Mr. Bloggs...check your six though, 404 Titan is lurking high and above ready to pounce.
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Everywhere
Posts: 424
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not saying they should have returned to SUB. This happened after TOC and they had time to think. With two eng being suspect, maybe a SIN or Borneo would have been a good choice.
Be suspect of the advise you get from IOC, they are not looking at you best interest.
Be suspect of the advise you get from IOC, they are not looking at you best interest.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Britain
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The place to be with unexplained problems on both engines of a two engine aeroplane is on the ground as soon as possible. Pressing on to destination was not wise. Even if the situation had not deteriorated, the decision was still not wise. The proof? Give MC a call now with the same symptoms and see what they say.
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Away
Posts: 300
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Exactly.
The advice from Engineering won't be repeated. That appears to be a systemic error. With flight following, we are all encouraged to check before diverting. They did. Question of whether or not they should have taken the advice is for the next player.
Individual operator error? No; systemic, though if repeated I'd say 'all' would frown. So to the end game, the landing.
Bear in mind the real problems occured at top of descent. At TOD! Not a lot of time to figure out the curved ball. Keeping your cool at that stage must not have been simple. But they did, and that is what's outstanding.
Identifying systemic errors usually only happens after the event.
On PPRuNe.
The advice from Engineering won't be repeated. That appears to be a systemic error. With flight following, we are all encouraged to check before diverting. They did. Question of whether or not they should have taken the advice is for the next player.
Individual operator error? No; systemic, though if repeated I'd say 'all' would frown. So to the end game, the landing.
Bear in mind the real problems occured at top of descent. At TOD! Not a lot of time to figure out the curved ball. Keeping your cool at that stage must not have been simple. But they did, and that is what's outstanding.
Identifying systemic errors usually only happens after the event.
On PPRuNe.
fastman737
My opinion hasn’t changed since the preliminary report if you had bothered reading my previous posts. Mind you I can’t expect too much from someone that is obviously illiterate. Next.
My opinion hasn’t changed since the preliminary report if you had bothered reading my previous posts. Mind you I can’t expect too much from someone that is obviously illiterate. Next.
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Coonabarabran
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Management Lurking Behaviour
fastman737 thanks for the input but 2 posts in 10 years??? Smells a bit like "management lurking behaviour".
Mark H "chief 747 lurker" has had his say by the look of it.
Mark H "chief 747 lurker" has had his say by the look of it.
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Oz
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Would shutting down the one working engine prior to landing have been the right decision?
FOR: slow it down
AGAINST: dual hydraulic low level
alternate law
2 spoilers per wing
outer ailerons only(if G+B lo pr)
inner ailerons only(if G+Y lo pr)
nose wheel steering inop
anti skid inop(if G+B lo pr)
flaps slow(if G+B lo pr)
right elevator only(if G+B lo pr)
left elevator only(if G+Y lo pr)
sloppy controls made worse by flap demand
All those FOR..............all those AGAINST
AGAINST has it
Well done to those in the hot seat.
Badluck for those in the armchair seat.
FOR: slow it down
AGAINST: dual hydraulic low level
alternate law
2 spoilers per wing
outer ailerons only(if G+B lo pr)
inner ailerons only(if G+Y lo pr)
nose wheel steering inop
anti skid inop(if G+B lo pr)
flaps slow(if G+B lo pr)
right elevator only(if G+B lo pr)
left elevator only(if G+Y lo pr)
sloppy controls made worse by flap demand
All those FOR..............all those AGAINST
AGAINST has it
Well done to those in the hot seat.
Badluck for those in the armchair seat.
Hey NEWS you forgot reverse thrust. Heard from the safety department that the combination of landing close to the numbers and reverse thrust helped prevent an overun.
Well to the boys involved.
Well to the boys involved.
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Would shutting down the one working engine prior to landing have been the right decision?
Well Done News....you have proven that you can beg / borrow / steal an Airbus FCOM and pick out all the "highlights" of a Double Engine Failure.....clever Lad indeed!
Only one very small problem with your otherwise bulletproof arguement.....
Shutting down the one at 70% would have still left one Engine RUNNING, (albeit at Idle) and supplied you with G Hyd and either Yellow or Blue as well
( depending on the one shut down) and all the electrics etc etc etc.
Therefore, your very exciting, and drama filled list of problems would not have occurred!
But hey....lets never let the FACTS get in the way of a great story
Well Done News....you have proven that you can beg / borrow / steal an Airbus FCOM and pick out all the "highlights" of a Double Engine Failure.....clever Lad indeed!
Only one very small problem with your otherwise bulletproof arguement.....
Shutting down the one at 70% would have still left one Engine RUNNING, (albeit at Idle) and supplied you with G Hyd and either Yellow or Blue as well
( depending on the one shut down) and all the electrics etc etc etc.
Therefore, your very exciting, and drama filled list of problems would not have occurred!
But hey....lets never let the FACTS get in the way of a great story
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 672
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Shutting down the one at 70% would have still left one Engine RUNNING, (albeit at Idle) and supplied you with G Hyd and either Yellow or Blue as well