Full emergency call out for minor incident at LHR!
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: London Gatwick
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The A340 was dispatched by one of my friends on the ramp and after departure the system noticed that the flaps were not synchronised by a degree or two and so it locked all flap movements. Its a safety system designed to prevent flap retraction or extension on just one side of the wing...
Came about after the crash of the AA DC10 in ORD a few decades ago...
This is what I was told...
Came about after the crash of the AA DC10 in ORD a few decades ago...
This is what I was told...
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: london/UK
Posts: 499
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I spent 13 years working as a Police Officer at LHR, and have been on the recieving end of many full emergency calls.
The idea of the excersise is to have an appropriate response there should whatever the aircrafts problem is, turn into a major incident.
I am not old enough to remember the Staines air crash, but I understand that within minutes the roads where clogged with sightseers to the extent that emergency services couldn't get into, nor out of the scene. Staines happened in the early 70's when there were far less vehicles on the roads, imagine what would happen now.
The BAA Fire service are the prime response and they are backed up by the Local Authority fire service, who attend the RV Point.
The London Ambulance service also go to the RV point and stand by. Its obvious that should an aircraft go crunch the 4 ambulances wont help matters much, but its a start.
The Police response is again to the RVP, again on standby. These officers form an initial response, forming a corden and liason with the other emergency services.
Police would co ordinate all 3 emergency services in the event of a crash. There is an Non Heathrow Police response, mostly in respect of traffic points in an attempt to prevent emergency routes being clogged up.
OK so thats why there is a meeting of emergency services when a full emergecy is declared.
There is also a response to 'local standby's', 'aircraft ground incidents' and 'acts of aggression ground'.
The information comes from ATC via the aircraft emergency line to Heathrow Police control room, the BAA fire services watch room and the airport PABX. It's then farmed out by those 3 to the appropriate outside agencies.
Over response? well yes every time an aircraft with an emergency lands safely you could say that, but better safe than sorry.
On occations things don't work as advertised, I remeber being in the Police Control room the direct line from the tower rang (ie not the emergency line) The controllers said " Sorry havn't got time to put this out, got a 767 on finals total hydraulic failier and its probably going to go off the end of the runway, can you block the Eastern perri?"
No full emergency was declared, so I called it 'Aircraft Accident Imminant' for Police purposes.
The initial resposne was no differant to a full emergency (apart from a few bums twitching in our senior management) and the aircraft landed safely.
The idea of the excersise is to have an appropriate response there should whatever the aircrafts problem is, turn into a major incident.
I am not old enough to remember the Staines air crash, but I understand that within minutes the roads where clogged with sightseers to the extent that emergency services couldn't get into, nor out of the scene. Staines happened in the early 70's when there were far less vehicles on the roads, imagine what would happen now.
The BAA Fire service are the prime response and they are backed up by the Local Authority fire service, who attend the RV Point.
The London Ambulance service also go to the RV point and stand by. Its obvious that should an aircraft go crunch the 4 ambulances wont help matters much, but its a start.
The Police response is again to the RVP, again on standby. These officers form an initial response, forming a corden and liason with the other emergency services.
Police would co ordinate all 3 emergency services in the event of a crash. There is an Non Heathrow Police response, mostly in respect of traffic points in an attempt to prevent emergency routes being clogged up.
OK so thats why there is a meeting of emergency services when a full emergecy is declared.
There is also a response to 'local standby's', 'aircraft ground incidents' and 'acts of aggression ground'.
The information comes from ATC via the aircraft emergency line to Heathrow Police control room, the BAA fire services watch room and the airport PABX. It's then farmed out by those 3 to the appropriate outside agencies.
Over response? well yes every time an aircraft with an emergency lands safely you could say that, but better safe than sorry.
On occations things don't work as advertised, I remeber being in the Police Control room the direct line from the tower rang (ie not the emergency line) The controllers said " Sorry havn't got time to put this out, got a 767 on finals total hydraulic failier and its probably going to go off the end of the runway, can you block the Eastern perri?"
No full emergency was declared, so I called it 'Aircraft Accident Imminant' for Police purposes.
The initial resposne was no differant to a full emergency (apart from a few bums twitching in our senior management) and the aircraft landed safely.
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: U.K.
Posts: 615
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well BJCC - In terms of the "planned response" they ought to go as advertised. You must have checklists to follow up until such time as the unexpected occurs? - then you need to use your experience and common sense.
I think it incredible that you took it upon yourself to decide upon an Aircraft Accident Imminent. If ATC did not use the normal means of contact, why did you not at least ask what level of response they were looking for? An aircraft going off the end of a runway does not always lead to disaster. I have witnessed a 757 with total hydraulic failure land and come to a stop within 7,000ft.
I can't believe the response levels for a FE and an AAI at Heathrow are so similar in terms of turn out apart from your added description of "twitching".
I have yet to react to an AAI but know the inner sensation when your mobile lets you know it is an AA - and the emotions are poles apart.
I think it incredible that you took it upon yourself to decide upon an Aircraft Accident Imminent. If ATC did not use the normal means of contact, why did you not at least ask what level of response they were looking for? An aircraft going off the end of a runway does not always lead to disaster. I have witnessed a 757 with total hydraulic failure land and come to a stop within 7,000ft.
I can't believe the response levels for a FE and an AAI at Heathrow are so similar in terms of turn out apart from your added description of "twitching".
I have yet to react to an AAI but know the inner sensation when your mobile lets you know it is an AA - and the emotions are poles apart.
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: western europe
Posts: 1,367
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
quote .....
"The controllers said " Sorry havn't got time to put this out, got a 767 on finals total hydraulic failure and its probably going to go off the end of the runway, can you block the Eastern perri?"
and another view .....
"An aircraft going off the end of a runway does not always lead to disaster."
seems to me that some Airport "Services" need to get together for a very detailed discussion
"The controllers said " Sorry havn't got time to put this out, got a 767 on finals total hydraulic failure and its probably going to go off the end of the runway, can you block the Eastern perri?"
and another view .....
"An aircraft going off the end of a runway does not always lead to disaster."
seems to me that some Airport "Services" need to get together for a very detailed discussion
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: london/UK
Posts: 499
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
GK430
Work as advertised??? OK, the theory for this incident was that ATC would pick up the emergency phone, wait till Police, fire and PABX answer, give a formatted message and wait for PABX to read it back. The wait for Police and fire to aknowlage. A good 3 or 4 minutes worth on a good day.
Read what I said, the aircraft is on finals, ATC ask for the perri to be closed and the aircraft has total hydralics failier. the information has not come via the emergency line and the comment is he doesn't have the time to do so, so the request is from what he said and the intonation of his voice very urgent.
From the above information, using common sense and experience (yes I have that a plenty) the obvious conculution is the aircraft may well over run the runway. In any case given whats been said I don't have the time to ask the ins and out's of a dogs backside, that can wait (common sense there). I organsied the blocking of the road then informed Police and Police only that for now I was calling it aircraft accident imminant. The initial response was no different from a full emergency so makes no difference to anyone else. Now to me that seemed reasonable. To you it may not have done, but then to me sittting having a technical discussion while an aircraft sails off the end of a runway, then onto a road full of cars is not acceptable. Experience? Yes ask the crash crews at RAF Northolt, where the same thing happened with a biz jet that ended up enbeded in the front of a van on the A40.
I think you miss understand the things don't work as advertised. I mean that theory and reality tend to part company at a very early stage of an incident, 1 spent 19 years in the Police, and dealt with 1000's of incidents raging from bomb threats to bombs for real to aircraft emergencies to aircraft accidents for real. from threats to murders from pub fights to domestic disputes. So I am well used to using common sense and I know there are times to have a discussion and when to do something first then discuss it later.
Check lists are good for the first 2 minutes and reminding you to inform someone, the reality of controlling an incident means that ad lib is the order of the day, it works!
Work as advertised??? OK, the theory for this incident was that ATC would pick up the emergency phone, wait till Police, fire and PABX answer, give a formatted message and wait for PABX to read it back. The wait for Police and fire to aknowlage. A good 3 or 4 minutes worth on a good day.
Read what I said, the aircraft is on finals, ATC ask for the perri to be closed and the aircraft has total hydralics failier. the information has not come via the emergency line and the comment is he doesn't have the time to do so, so the request is from what he said and the intonation of his voice very urgent.
From the above information, using common sense and experience (yes I have that a plenty) the obvious conculution is the aircraft may well over run the runway. In any case given whats been said I don't have the time to ask the ins and out's of a dogs backside, that can wait (common sense there). I organsied the blocking of the road then informed Police and Police only that for now I was calling it aircraft accident imminant. The initial response was no different from a full emergency so makes no difference to anyone else. Now to me that seemed reasonable. To you it may not have done, but then to me sittting having a technical discussion while an aircraft sails off the end of a runway, then onto a road full of cars is not acceptable. Experience? Yes ask the crash crews at RAF Northolt, where the same thing happened with a biz jet that ended up enbeded in the front of a van on the A40.
I think you miss understand the things don't work as advertised. I mean that theory and reality tend to part company at a very early stage of an incident, 1 spent 19 years in the Police, and dealt with 1000's of incidents raging from bomb threats to bombs for real to aircraft emergencies to aircraft accidents for real. from threats to murders from pub fights to domestic disputes. So I am well used to using common sense and I know there are times to have a discussion and when to do something first then discuss it later.
Check lists are good for the first 2 minutes and reminding you to inform someone, the reality of controlling an incident means that ad lib is the order of the day, it works!
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: U.K.
Posts: 615
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We are going slightly off track here. The initial post was about a declared FE that somehow turned into an AAI. That seemed to have upped the Ambulance Service response which was then called into question.
That was where I questioned the lack of adhering to procs.
Now in the case you mention, you can start asking a lot more questions; and yes, I fully concur with your comments that after each serious/major incident you can go and re-write one's procs because unless you are a genius, you are always going to learn.
Maybe Heathrow Dir. can add light - a 767 with only a few track miles to run with total hydraulic failure prior to it being appreciated by anyone?
When was it discovered that this was the situation? On lowering the gear? Did it become evident with the first stage of flap? Before either of the above?
I would like to think if you had this situation arise that the app. might at least be delayed, subject fuel reserves, in order to ensure the activation of the emergency services with a FE being declared and to save an Aircraft Accident Imminent being presumed by various participants.
At our RVP one day during a FE, whilst the a/c in question was still dumping fuel, I overheard one of your colleaugues inform those gathered that he had just heard that the subject aircraft was going to crash. This creates anarchy when you are not keeping to the facts. I had to make several phone calls to be satisfied that the initial technical fault on the aircraft had not mushroomedinto something we were not aware of.
As Heathrow Dir states.............and follow them until something happens that's not in the book.
That was where I questioned the lack of adhering to procs.
Now in the case you mention, you can start asking a lot more questions; and yes, I fully concur with your comments that after each serious/major incident you can go and re-write one's procs because unless you are a genius, you are always going to learn.Maybe Heathrow Dir. can add light - a 767 with only a few track miles to run with total hydraulic failure prior to it being appreciated by anyone?
When was it discovered that this was the situation? On lowering the gear? Did it become evident with the first stage of flap? Before either of the above?
I would like to think if you had this situation arise that the app. might at least be delayed, subject fuel reserves, in order to ensure the activation of the emergency services with a FE being declared and to save an Aircraft Accident Imminent being presumed by various participants.
At our RVP one day during a FE, whilst the a/c in question was still dumping fuel, I overheard one of your colleaugues inform those gathered that he had just heard that the subject aircraft was going to crash. This creates anarchy when you are not keeping to the facts. I had to make several phone calls to be satisfied that the initial technical fault on the aircraft had not mushroomedinto something we were not aware of.
As Heathrow Dir states.............and follow them until something happens that's not in the book.
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: london/UK
Posts: 499
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Again GK430, I think you have missed the point, which is that there are times when you act first and ask questions later. Had ATC done things 'by the book' the aircraft would have landed and had the worst happened been embedded in the Eastern perri road. The way we were informed gave us a fighting chance of getting the road closed. In the event it wasn't nessesary, but I am sure had the worst happened and the road not been closed then the justified clamours for someones blood would have been very loud!
As with many things, the circumstances I described was all a 'grey' area. Black and white looks good in books, but constantly trying to follow what the book says as circumstances drift further and further away helps no one. Of course if you train people to deal with things by the book you take away thier ability to think for themselves and deal with things not contained in one of the many volumes you would need to cover every eventuality you can thing of.
Now as regards to the original post, having read about the bus station being evacuated it sounds like there were 2 incidents and some missintrpretation. The bus station at lhr is not used in any part of the emergency planning. All emergency services go to the nominated RVP. The nature of heathrow, ie the 3 main terminals being in the middle (along with the bus station) and only being reached by tunnel means that this area will clog almost instantly.
So using the bus station as an RVP is pointless.
From reading your post it seems as if you get a slightly longer warning, at Heathrow we used to get at best 10 minutes warning, at worst (ie the example I gave) very much less. I can also recall ATC reading a full emergency details as we watching the aircraft land on cctv. All a little late.
Before you ask, we had taken this up with ATC on numerous occations, which was met with all sorts of reasons why we didn't get longer.
You point out that all FE's are a blue light response, the reasons being that ATC have made a decision based on the information they have there is a danger to the aircraft. In my example I based my decision on the ATCO's experience, ie they don't tend to cry wolf. I stand by what I said in that he used common sense, knowing that the prescribed method of notification would have taken too long for the response needed, ie the road closing. I also stand by my decision, given the information that I would grade it for our purposes as AAI. To not do so would have made the road closure unnessary. In fact I had to justify my reasons to my senior management (and thier slightly soiled underware) and my reasons where accepted without critisium (I do wish I could spell!)
I take your point over the Police Officer at the RVP, although you mention you overheard him. Did you ask him any questions like what he based his statement on? Sounds to me like a bored PC at an RVP doing what he's done many times before saying something daft to lighten the moment. You are probably as aware of emergency services sense of humour as I am.
As with many things, the circumstances I described was all a 'grey' area. Black and white looks good in books, but constantly trying to follow what the book says as circumstances drift further and further away helps no one. Of course if you train people to deal with things by the book you take away thier ability to think for themselves and deal with things not contained in one of the many volumes you would need to cover every eventuality you can thing of.
Now as regards to the original post, having read about the bus station being evacuated it sounds like there were 2 incidents and some missintrpretation. The bus station at lhr is not used in any part of the emergency planning. All emergency services go to the nominated RVP. The nature of heathrow, ie the 3 main terminals being in the middle (along with the bus station) and only being reached by tunnel means that this area will clog almost instantly.
So using the bus station as an RVP is pointless.
From reading your post it seems as if you get a slightly longer warning, at Heathrow we used to get at best 10 minutes warning, at worst (ie the example I gave) very much less. I can also recall ATC reading a full emergency details as we watching the aircraft land on cctv. All a little late.
Before you ask, we had taken this up with ATC on numerous occations, which was met with all sorts of reasons why we didn't get longer.
You point out that all FE's are a blue light response, the reasons being that ATC have made a decision based on the information they have there is a danger to the aircraft. In my example I based my decision on the ATCO's experience, ie they don't tend to cry wolf. I stand by what I said in that he used common sense, knowing that the prescribed method of notification would have taken too long for the response needed, ie the road closing. I also stand by my decision, given the information that I would grade it for our purposes as AAI. To not do so would have made the road closure unnessary. In fact I had to justify my reasons to my senior management (and thier slightly soiled underware) and my reasons where accepted without critisium (I do wish I could spell!)
I take your point over the Police Officer at the RVP, although you mention you overheard him. Did you ask him any questions like what he based his statement on? Sounds to me like a bored PC at an RVP doing what he's done many times before saying something daft to lighten the moment. You are probably as aware of emergency services sense of humour as I am.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: UK
Age: 48
Posts: 590
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Notso's prefered option is clearly for the emergency services and ATC to do nothing until there is a smashed aeroplane and dismembered bodies over the field before wasting his precious tax money.
A wonderful advert for flying with BA.
Oh and before whining about personal attacks, I suggest you read some of your posts again.
A wonderful advert for flying with BA.
Oh and before whining about personal attacks, I suggest you read some of your posts again.
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: LHR/EGLL
Age: 45
Posts: 4,392
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This topic is starting to go round in circles now. My last contribution.
Just to be specific, the declared FE was follwed by the appropriate response. There was no mention of the ATC term 'Aircraft Accident Imminent', it was an Ambulance Service only 'Crash Imminent' which is a 'domestic' call and determines the amount of support equipment, mobile control post etc.
Two different things. It certainly never 'turned into' an AAI.
The initial post was about a declared FE that somehow turned into an AAI. That seemed to have upped the Ambulance Service response which was then called into question.
Two different things. It certainly never 'turned into' an AAI.
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: london/UK
Posts: 499
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes Gonzo, I can see that, I made the point, as everyone was talking about a bus station evacuation that there may have been a problem (unconnected) there and that may have caused a bit of confusion..I wonder if it was an act of aggression ground? which then got lost in translation when the star centre informed LAS at Waterloo. Could that have led to you being misinformed?
Guest
Posts: n/a
bjcc,
Most often the reason is likely that the flight deck are playing their cards close to their chest and getting all the info out so that the correct response can be put on is like getting blood out of a stone.
There are so many non-legit users monitoring the frequencies these days that you can, to a certain extent, understand but it can make life difficult when at very short notice what was intitially believed to be a fairly minor problem is revealed to be rather more serious
Before you ask, we had taken this up with ATC on numerous occations, which was met with all sorts of reasons why we didn't get longer.
There are so many non-legit users monitoring the frequencies these days that you can, to a certain extent, understand but it can make life difficult when at very short notice what was intitially believed to be a fairly minor problem is revealed to be rather more serious
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: london/UK
Posts: 499
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Warped Factor,
Yes that was one of the reasons given. Our resposnse was it was totaly unacceptable.
OK, I can understand why the crew wouldn't want the greater public to know, but at some point they are going to have to come clean. The trouble is that if they do that at the last minute they run the risk of the emergency services not being there in time.
Some pilots have complained (probably rightly) that emergency services have little understanding of aircraft emergencies. , its also true that crews have no real idea of how emergency services plan to deal with it should it go wrong.
In order to get everything in place with the minimum of fuss we need time. The LFB and LAS need to get thier vehicles to the airport, Police need to get outside traffic units to choke points to try to keep emergency access/egress routes open, roads on the airport may need to be closed this all takes time. Declearing a problem on finals doesn't give anyone a chance in hell, and may well cause loss of life.
There is a lot lot more to an aircraft accident the fire service squirting foam about, then a few ambulances trundling along and picking up the injured, leaving the old bill to guard the wreckage so no one nicks it.
The original post says that this call was a Full Emergency, the response from some aircrew is its an over reaction, can I remind you Kegworth was a full emergency.
Yes that was one of the reasons given. Our resposnse was it was totaly unacceptable.
OK, I can understand why the crew wouldn't want the greater public to know, but at some point they are going to have to come clean. The trouble is that if they do that at the last minute they run the risk of the emergency services not being there in time.
Some pilots have complained (probably rightly) that emergency services have little understanding of aircraft emergencies. , its also true that crews have no real idea of how emergency services plan to deal with it should it go wrong.
In order to get everything in place with the minimum of fuss we need time. The LFB and LAS need to get thier vehicles to the airport, Police need to get outside traffic units to choke points to try to keep emergency access/egress routes open, roads on the airport may need to be closed this all takes time. Declearing a problem on finals doesn't give anyone a chance in hell, and may well cause loss of life.
There is a lot lot more to an aircraft accident the fire service squirting foam about, then a few ambulances trundling along and picking up the injured, leaving the old bill to guard the wreckage so no one nicks it.
The original post says that this call was a Full Emergency, the response from some aircrew is its an over reaction, can I remind you Kegworth was a full emergency.
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Kagerplassen
Posts: 223
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My 2 cents worth:
1. A crew yelling mayday or pan-pan is IMHO not automatically asking for the crash crew... as I'm just in simulator training, changing from 320 to 340, I make mayday-calls on a daily basis now :-).
In the 340 it would be dependent on which hydraulic system fails... The green (main) system could bring me to "mayday", while a failure of the yellow system would be a 'return to the field for technical reasons'.
Following the same line of thought: a single engine failure on a 4-engined a/c is no mayday, but a double -offcourse- is.
2. In the simulator I always ask for a certain type of assistance, which I believe is appropriate for the failure we have at hand. If the controller decides to bring out the full crash crew, when I only need some vectors for a minor navigational problem, or when I only need another FL because of a failed pack, it would be a waste of time and money.
3. During joint-training sessions with ATC here at our homebase, we found out that it is indeed difficult to provide all the information ATC would need to base their own opinion about the severity of the failure on. Usually we are too busy flying, trouble shooting, talking with the purser, making PA speeches etc... ATC is only a part of all the things we need to do in an emergency. Personally I learned to give exact information about the failure ("we lost one hydraulic system, we will remain on the runway after landing because our nosewheelsteering is inop, there is no danger for passangers or aircraft upon landing"), and as well to be very exact in my requests ("we need vectors for 35 NM untill landing").
4. I think Gonzo's reaction was correct, however the procedures should be changed. As I stated above, a partial hydraulic loss does not automatically mean that the flight is in danger. In this particular case every pilot (I hope) would ask for the longest runway, but that does not automatically imply an overrun. It is difficult to act on so little information, but I agree with the "better safe than sorry"-scenario.
5. Flaps/Slats stuck at config two might not be a reason for bringing out the crash crew, but I would qualify the failure as 'serious' anyway. Maybe losing one generator could be 'minor', but stuck flight controls is IMHO something bigger (abnormal pitch attitude at landing, abnormal speed, abnormal stresslevel in the cockpit etc.).
Happy landings!
P77
1. A crew yelling mayday or pan-pan is IMHO not automatically asking for the crash crew... as I'm just in simulator training, changing from 320 to 340, I make mayday-calls on a daily basis now :-).
In the 340 it would be dependent on which hydraulic system fails... The green (main) system could bring me to "mayday", while a failure of the yellow system would be a 'return to the field for technical reasons'.
Following the same line of thought: a single engine failure on a 4-engined a/c is no mayday, but a double -offcourse- is.
2. In the simulator I always ask for a certain type of assistance, which I believe is appropriate for the failure we have at hand. If the controller decides to bring out the full crash crew, when I only need some vectors for a minor navigational problem, or when I only need another FL because of a failed pack, it would be a waste of time and money.
3. During joint-training sessions with ATC here at our homebase, we found out that it is indeed difficult to provide all the information ATC would need to base their own opinion about the severity of the failure on. Usually we are too busy flying, trouble shooting, talking with the purser, making PA speeches etc... ATC is only a part of all the things we need to do in an emergency. Personally I learned to give exact information about the failure ("we lost one hydraulic system, we will remain on the runway after landing because our nosewheelsteering is inop, there is no danger for passangers or aircraft upon landing"), and as well to be very exact in my requests ("we need vectors for 35 NM untill landing").
4. I think Gonzo's reaction was correct, however the procedures should be changed. As I stated above, a partial hydraulic loss does not automatically mean that the flight is in danger. In this particular case every pilot (I hope) would ask for the longest runway, but that does not automatically imply an overrun. It is difficult to act on so little information, but I agree with the "better safe than sorry"-scenario.
5. Flaps/Slats stuck at config two might not be a reason for bringing out the crash crew, but I would qualify the failure as 'serious' anyway. Maybe losing one generator could be 'minor', but stuck flight controls is IMHO something bigger (abnormal pitch attitude at landing, abnormal speed, abnormal stresslevel in the cockpit etc.).
Happy landings!
P77
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: london/UK
Posts: 499
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pegasus77 - Agree with the better safe than sorry scenario, and at Heathrow and I presume most other UK airports thats what you get.
I can see the sense in the you "ask for the longest runway, but that does not automatically imply an overrun", But I am not keen on the does not automatically imply part of the statement.
Unless its just your choice of words that means that its possible you would overrun, but its not an automatic given. If thats the case, then I would suggest that the full emergency response is called for, given your better safe than sorry statement. If its my misunderstanding then I am sorry, ignore the above.
You say that you have joint training with ATC, what about the emergency services? Have you any idea how and what needs to be brought in to deal with a crash?
If not, then you perhaps can see my point about aircrews making a decision late or making an assumption that there is an over reaction.
Someone suggested earlier in this thread that airport services should get together and discuss matters, they are right!
At LHR, they used to run crash seminars, there were no aircrew at the one I went to, and the lack of knowladge of the airport emergency plans was breathtaking, even senoir members of the BAA had no idea.
I can see the sense in the you "ask for the longest runway, but that does not automatically imply an overrun", But I am not keen on the does not automatically imply part of the statement.
Unless its just your choice of words that means that its possible you would overrun, but its not an automatic given. If thats the case, then I would suggest that the full emergency response is called for, given your better safe than sorry statement. If its my misunderstanding then I am sorry, ignore the above.
You say that you have joint training with ATC, what about the emergency services? Have you any idea how and what needs to be brought in to deal with a crash?
If not, then you perhaps can see my point about aircrews making a decision late or making an assumption that there is an over reaction.
Someone suggested earlier in this thread that airport services should get together and discuss matters, they are right!
At LHR, they used to run crash seminars, there were no aircrew at the one I went to, and the lack of knowladge of the airport emergency plans was breathtaking, even senoir members of the BAA had no idea.
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: U.K.
Posts: 615
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
bjcc wrote
"At LHR, they used to run crash seminars, there were no aircrew at the one I went to, and the lack of knowladge of the airport emergency plans was breathtaking, even senoir members of the BAA had no idea."
_________________________________________________
Please tell me you don't mean this!
"At LHR, they used to run crash seminars, there were no aircrew at the one I went to, and the lack of knowladge of the airport emergency plans was breathtaking, even senoir members of the BAA had no idea."
_________________________________________________
Please tell me you don't mean this!
FX Guru
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Greenwich
Age: 67
Posts: 900
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm late to this topic.
I'm mere SLF.
My brother-in-law was on this flight.
He backs Gonzo 100 percent.
Sorry Danny, disagree with your post. Let's err on the side of caution. Be safer, not sorry.
I'm mere SLF.
My brother-in-law was on this flight.
He backs Gonzo 100 percent.
Sorry Danny, disagree with your post. Let's err on the side of caution. Be safer, not sorry.
Have you ever tried to write an emergency response plan? If you cover every eventuality you will end up with a document that is so complex it is unuseable. You have to simplify. The first consequence is that to 'fail safe' the emergency plan will always tend to over react. You then get criticised for over-reacting. The second consequence is that for each scenario you will base your response sequence on the most likely, or most catostrophic, sequence of events. This means the response sequence may be wrong for a less likely, or less catosptrophic, sequence of events.
You then go home in the evening, have a few glasses of wine, and hope that on the day someone (like an ATCO calling a cop and saying 'close the bloody road, NOW!) will use their common sense, rather than hide behind 'the plan'.
I am not a pilot, but I believe a similar logic is built into the V2 call on take off: the plan says, 'after V2 take the problem into the air', because most times that is the right thing to do. Some times it will be the wrong thing to do, but you need a simple rule, not a decision tree. You just hope the pilot will recognise when the rule does not apply.
You then go home in the evening, have a few glasses of wine, and hope that on the day someone (like an ATCO calling a cop and saying 'close the bloody road, NOW!) will use their common sense, rather than hide behind 'the plan'.
I am not a pilot, but I believe a similar logic is built into the V2 call on take off: the plan says, 'after V2 take the problem into the air', because most times that is the right thing to do. Some times it will be the wrong thing to do, but you need a simple rule, not a decision tree. You just hope the pilot will recognise when the rule does not apply.
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: U.K.
Posts: 615
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SLF 3
You're not wrong. However, aeronautical emergency planning on airfields is laid out in black & white by the CAA - at least the minimum responses are. An individual aerodrome licensee may then apply local issues as deemed fit.
Furthermore, whilst most emergecies end up as
"non-events" - fortunately, those that do not, tend to be entirely different in most respects and you therefore cannot be too prescriptive. You do however, have to have the basics clearly defined.
By the way V1 and ATCO's in my experience tend to stick with the book.
You're not wrong. However, aeronautical emergency planning on airfields is laid out in black & white by the CAA - at least the minimum responses are. An individual aerodrome licensee may then apply local issues as deemed fit.
Furthermore, whilst most emergecies end up as
"non-events" - fortunately, those that do not, tend to be entirely different in most respects and you therefore cannot be too prescriptive. You do however, have to have the basics clearly defined.
By the way V1 and ATCO's in my experience tend to stick with the book.
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: london/UK
Posts: 499
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ah, now then GK430, I have to take issue again with you...Its not personel honest!.
The CAA can be as black and white as they like, the defence of "thats how I was ordered to do it sir" holds no sway. At any public enquiry do you honestly think that the CAA rep is going to stand there and say "yes the plane went off the end of the runway and wiped out 3 buses full of people as well as the passengers on the aircraft because we instruct that the emergency must be dealt with and called in the following way" Like hell they are!
Every instruction manual I have ever come accross has had words that amount to the following at the begining
" Nothing in these instructions prevent anyone from using thier inititive should circumstances demand it"
The reason thats there is so they author doesn't have to stand up in front of a public enquiry and find a reason why lots of people died because of something he didn't think of.
The minimum responses are not set out by the CAA as far as Police are concerned, thats a matter for the local chief officer. I think you will find that the CAA just say that suffiecent Police should be available.
As regards to fire and ambulance the CAA may well advise but it would be impossible to dictate as certainly ambulance cover is a viariable, dependent upon other incidients happening elsewhere.
You asked me to explain the aircarft crash seminar comment. Well The BAA used to (I presume they still do) run aircraft crash seminars at LHR. places at the seminar were filled by police, fire ambulance staff, there were a couple of ATCO's at the one I attened, members of the BAA airport duty management and doctors from the local A&E. There were also staff from airlines who may have to deal with relitives or onward travel of walking wounded, also the woman who ran EPIC for BA. You will note that the above list does not include any aircrew.
The seminar basicly was in the form of a senario, then reps from verious organisations went through for everyones benifit what action thier organisation would take, at each stage as the senario developed.
The BAA took thier usual attitude of we own the airport, ergo we will decide what happens, which is B@@@@@ks. It showed a total lack of knowlage of thier own emergency orders. They were left in no doubt by a Station Officer from the LFB that they were not in charge, he was until any fire was out, then the Police were.
The main stumbling block being that the BAA reps thought only of continuing operations at the airport where as the LFB and us, not being under commercal pressure considered that to be bottom of the priority list. It was a good learning experience, and gave us some idea of what to expect a year or so later when paddy threw things over the perrimeter fence, which incidently led to me, (being in the Police control room, chucking the emergency orders out of the door as being of no use what so ever in the circumstances.
The CAA can be as black and white as they like, the defence of "thats how I was ordered to do it sir" holds no sway. At any public enquiry do you honestly think that the CAA rep is going to stand there and say "yes the plane went off the end of the runway and wiped out 3 buses full of people as well as the passengers on the aircraft because we instruct that the emergency must be dealt with and called in the following way" Like hell they are!
Every instruction manual I have ever come accross has had words that amount to the following at the begining
" Nothing in these instructions prevent anyone from using thier inititive should circumstances demand it"
The reason thats there is so they author doesn't have to stand up in front of a public enquiry and find a reason why lots of people died because of something he didn't think of.
The minimum responses are not set out by the CAA as far as Police are concerned, thats a matter for the local chief officer. I think you will find that the CAA just say that suffiecent Police should be available.
As regards to fire and ambulance the CAA may well advise but it would be impossible to dictate as certainly ambulance cover is a viariable, dependent upon other incidients happening elsewhere.
You asked me to explain the aircarft crash seminar comment. Well The BAA used to (I presume they still do) run aircraft crash seminars at LHR. places at the seminar were filled by police, fire ambulance staff, there were a couple of ATCO's at the one I attened, members of the BAA airport duty management and doctors from the local A&E. There were also staff from airlines who may have to deal with relitives or onward travel of walking wounded, also the woman who ran EPIC for BA. You will note that the above list does not include any aircrew.
The seminar basicly was in the form of a senario, then reps from verious organisations went through for everyones benifit what action thier organisation would take, at each stage as the senario developed.
The BAA took thier usual attitude of we own the airport, ergo we will decide what happens, which is B@@@@@ks. It showed a total lack of knowlage of thier own emergency orders. They were left in no doubt by a Station Officer from the LFB that they were not in charge, he was until any fire was out, then the Police were.
The main stumbling block being that the BAA reps thought only of continuing operations at the airport where as the LFB and us, not being under commercal pressure considered that to be bottom of the priority list. It was a good learning experience, and gave us some idea of what to expect a year or so later when paddy threw things over the perrimeter fence, which incidently led to me, (being in the Police control room, chucking the emergency orders out of the door as being of no use what so ever in the circumstances.