Refuelling with Pax on Board/Boarding
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: FL Whatever
Posts: 82
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Refuelling with Pax on Board/Boarding
Question for CX guys. In Hong Kong - are you required to have ground crew on the headset for refuelling with Pax on board/boarding?
I realise rules differ between countries - but what about in HKG?
I realise rules differ between countries - but what about in HKG?
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: n/a
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No specific requirement for ground staff, enough cabin crew and available doors is what you will need. But then again depends on what your Operations Manual states as well as what the airport authority authorise your company to do.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: FL Whatever
Posts: 82
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You’re so suspicious Oasis. It’s not a trick question. There seem to be variations in opinion on what is legally required and CX is what I would consider to be the Gold Standard. Hence the specific question.
Not interested in HX opinions thanks. Not renowned for adherence to regulations.
Not interested in HX opinions thanks. Not renowned for adherence to regulations.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: FL Whatever
Posts: 82
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And......? Do you know the answer?
Perhaps not.
Yes - but does someone have to be on the headset to maintain communications during fuelling with pax onboard?
Whats the point of having a headset plugged in and abandoned?
Maybe its unserviceable. Can you assume it will work when/if needed without at least a test call?
Perhaps not.
Yes - but does someone have to be on the headset to maintain communications during fuelling with pax onboard?
Whats the point of having a headset plugged in and abandoned?
Maybe its unserviceable. Can you assume it will work when/if needed without at least a test call?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: FL Whatever
Posts: 82
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Here's an extract from the HKIA AOM Part E Section 5 (On fuel handling procedures)
During fuelling with pax on board/boarding:
5.3.10 Communications shall be maintained by aeroplane intercommunications
system or other suitable means between the refuelling in-charge and the pilot.
What does that mean to you?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: FL Whatever
Posts: 82
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'll put it another way for you.
What if - during refuelling with pax on board - the Captain sees an ECAM Cargo Smoke Warning with firebell and red Master Caution.
What use is the headset if nobody is on it?
What use is the headset if he tries to use it and finds it is unserviceable?
Does MAINTAIN COMMUNICATIONS not mean establish and remain in contact?
What if - during refuelling with pax on board - the Captain sees an ECAM Cargo Smoke Warning with firebell and red Master Caution.
What use is the headset if nobody is on it?
What use is the headset if he tries to use it and finds it is unserviceable?
Does MAINTAIN COMMUNICATIONS not mean establish and remain in contact?
Yep, happens from time to time. False warnings from humidity, full ECAM smoke warning and it gets the Heart started.
It doesnt take much to handle the ECAM while a crew member contacts the mechanic or if he’s busy run down the stairs yourself and check....
“Headset connected” is all it says, they don’t need to be on it all the time.
Ok
It doesnt take much to handle the ECAM while a crew member contacts the mechanic or if he’s busy run down the stairs yourself and check....
“Headset connected” is all it says, they don’t need to be on it all the time.
Ok
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: FL Whatever
Posts: 82
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OK thanks ACMS.
But in fact the HKIA AOM does say Communications shall be maintained.
There may be debate as to what that actually means. But IMHO, what's the point of plugging in the headset if it's left unmanned and untested? Just for decoration?
If there IS any debate don't you think the SAFEST definition should be accepted? Isn't that what we're supposed to do? Prioritise safety?
Why NOT do it?
Is it a cost issue?
Safety first?
But in fact the HKIA AOM does say Communications shall be maintained.
There may be debate as to what that actually means. But IMHO, what's the point of plugging in the headset if it's left unmanned and untested? Just for decoration?
If there IS any debate don't you think the SAFEST definition should be accepted? Isn't that what we're supposed to do? Prioritise safety?
Why NOT do it?
Is it a cost issue?
Safety first?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: FL Whatever
Posts: 82
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I doubt that. Every time I do a walkaround I see mechanics playing Candy Crush on their phone, or having a snooze in the tug.
And anyway, is cost accepted by the CAD/HKIA as an acceptable reason for not applying the regulations?
Who did the analysis?
The bean counters?
And anyway, is cost accepted by the CAD/HKIA as an acceptable reason for not applying the regulations?
Who did the analysis?
The bean counters?
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: HK-CRoC
Posts: 749
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Plugged in and Abandoned
And......? Do you know the answer?
Perhaps not.
Yes - but does someone have to be on the headset to maintain communications during fuelling with pax onboard?
Whats the point of having a headset plugged in and abandoned?
Maybe its unserviceable. Can you assume it will work when/if needed without at least a test call?
Perhaps not.
Yes - but does someone have to be on the headset to maintain communications during fuelling with pax onboard?
Whats the point of having a headset plugged in and abandoned?
Maybe its unserviceable. Can you assume it will work when/if needed without at least a test call?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: FL Whatever
Posts: 82
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Used to be you had to have the Fire Services standing by at the aircraft during fuelling with pax on board.
Later it became necessary only if an incapacitated passenger was on board.
Then it became merely a request to ATC to 'advise' the Fire Services, but have a crewman on the headset during the whole process.
Now he just plugs in a dodgy headset and walks away.
But is it even legal? I wonder if the CAD/HKIA are aware of this practice and of the apparent conflict with the HKIA AOM?
Quote:CX is what I would consider to be the Gold Standard.
Last edited by ROW_BOT; 20th Jan 2019 at 15:55.
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Not in a Bus
Posts: 325
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just say thanks.
