Crew Member Injured
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: USA
Posts: 394
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And if Spiros does the hatch and stairs how soon will there be a repeat of the Turkish DC-10 out of Paris where the cargo door was forced closed improperly and the cabin floor collapsed resuting in loss of aircraft.
Having Spiros do it is not a bad idea with respect to the immediate problem but is it not better to have the crew of the aircraft and not a third party (or fourth or fifth) close up?
Having Spiros do it is not a bad idea with respect to the immediate problem but is it not better to have the crew of the aircraft and not a third party (or fourth or fifth) close up?
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Cheshire
Posts: 191
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why not just have a strap with a handle that is tethered to the door, and remains inside the aircraft when the door is open. Crew then simply stand well inside the aircraft and pull on the strap to close the door, only moving in to latch it when the door is "shut". Surely that's a cheap enough safety feature - even for the airlines 
Moderator
Join Date: Feb 1998
Location: Europe
Posts: 3,051
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
- Heavy, akward doors being handled by people whose selection criteria did not include muscle strength. I open/close the 737 frwrd service door about 6 times a day. I'm pretty strong, but I have to brace myself with one leg in the door frame and back against the other side of the frame to close it. Precarious position above the tarmac.
- Mandatory cost savings in all airlines I know of. Max rostering lads to fatigue leads to reduced alertness & increased risk of personal injury. Fact of life in the cabin of most airliners these days.
- The tightening up of operations on all levels makes everybody feel the pressure to 'get on with it'. CC are hired on their ability to be accomodating, on their willingness to please if you will. This makes us perhaps more suceptible to such pressures than others. In this respect, both pilot training and their less flexible mindset can be superior to what is often found in the cabin. Pilots seldomly let themselves be cowed by anyone. Many CC could do with more training and a stiffer backbone in this respect.
- Safety harnesses sound good, but I very much doubt their factual use in the mad rush that is short haul.
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Hampshire, UK
Posts: 207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Flapsforty,
Please can you elaborate a little on your third point? If I understand you correctly, the discipline involved in pilot's training creates a more confident and assertive character?
I'm not challenging what you're saying, but most cabin crew I've encountered as a customer have been as hard as nails, even the pretty ones
Please can you elaborate a little on your third point? If I understand you correctly, the discipline involved in pilot's training creates a more confident and assertive character?
I'm not challenging what you're saying, but most cabin crew I've encountered as a customer have been as hard as nails, even the pretty ones
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: U.K
Posts: 85
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
injured crew
Incident happened on a TCX flight from CFU - NCL.
Crew memeber was flown back by specially chartered 'biz' jet and is hopefully doing well in hospital.
BEagle - what witchdoctor means is that ryanair often will open the rear doors without steps in place, thus, surely an accident waiting to happen?
Topjet
Crew memeber was flown back by specially chartered 'biz' jet and is hopefully doing well in hospital.
BEagle - what witchdoctor means is that ryanair often will open the rear doors without steps in place, thus, surely an accident waiting to happen?
Topjet
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Wet Coast
Posts: 2,335
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
if Spiros does the hatch and stairs how soon will there be a repeat of the Turkish DC-10 out of Paris where the cargo door was forced closed improperly...
(emphasis mine). While convenient to blame a ramper who couldn't read the English instructions, the facts don't really support it.
Sorry to wander off topic, but let's not perpetuate myths/stereotypes. And while I generally disapprove of lawsuits, I certainly hope the FA in question gets well compensated (and well in all respects) for this unnecessary accident.
The underlying factor in the sequence of events leading to the accident was the incorrect engagement of the door latching mechanism before take-off. The characteristics of the design of the mechanism made it possible for the vent door to be apparently closed and the cargo door apparently locked when in fact the latches were not fully closed and the lock pins were not in place. It should be noted, however that a view port was provided so that there could be a visual check of the engagement of the lock pins. This defective closing of the door resulted from a combination of various factors: - incomplete application of Service Bulletin 52-37; - incorrect modifications and adjustments which led, in particular, to insufficient protrusion of the lock pins and to the switching off of the flight deck visual warning light before the door was locked; - the circumstances of the closure of the door during the stop at Orly, and, in particular, the absence of any visual inspection, through the viewport to verify that the lock pins were effectively engaged, although at the time of the accident inspection was rendered difficult by the inadequate diameter of the view port. All these risks had already become evident, nineteen months earlier, at the time of the Windsor accident, but no efficacious corrective action had followed.
Sorry to wander off topic, but let's not perpetuate myths/stereotypes. And while I generally disapprove of lawsuits, I certainly hope the FA in question gets well compensated (and well in all respects) for this unnecessary accident.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: California USA
Posts: 719
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It seems to me that procedural changes or physical devices will need to be centered upon the operation of the aircraft, rather than bear upon the stair-driver, if this is to have universal application. We need to ensure that CC are protected regardless of the prevailing regulatory scheme in the country they are visiting. In other words, and taking only 757s into consideration for the moment, it would be naïve to expect that every country in which CC are closing doors in proximity to external stairs today would adopt regulations which “ensured” that this kind of thing would not happen. Moreover, it would be stupid to bet your life on the expectation that a stair-driver would always comply with any such reg.
Sure, something like an ignition interlock on the stairs would be a wonderful idea. The last thing the CC would do as the door closed would be to reach out and flip the switch on the stairs, allowing the vehicle to start and drive away. But we all know that stairs without the interlock are going to show up at the aircraft, and that operators which DO use the interlock will sometimes disable it because it has become more trouble to the ground crew than it is worth…for instance, it has an intermittent fault or CC have forgotten to flip the switch from time to time, forcing the driver to climb the stairs and do it himself.
In the interest of full disclosure, Mrs. av8boy is long-time 757 CC and routinely flies into locations where enforcement of such a reg would be problematic. If a dependable solution is to be developed, I believe it will need to be aboard the aircraft itself.
Sure, something like an ignition interlock on the stairs would be a wonderful idea. The last thing the CC would do as the door closed would be to reach out and flip the switch on the stairs, allowing the vehicle to start and drive away. But we all know that stairs without the interlock are going to show up at the aircraft, and that operators which DO use the interlock will sometimes disable it because it has become more trouble to the ground crew than it is worth…for instance, it has an intermittent fault or CC have forgotten to flip the switch from time to time, forcing the driver to climb the stairs and do it himself.
In the interest of full disclosure, Mrs. av8boy is long-time 757 CC and routinely flies into locations where enforcement of such a reg would be problematic. If a dependable solution is to be developed, I believe it will need to be aboard the aircraft itself.
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: England
Posts: 89
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We have a procedure in place whereby the person removing the steps from the aircraft goes to the top of the steps and visually checks that the door is closed or waits there until the crew close it before operating the steps.
F.T.L
F.T.L
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Hong Kong
Age: 68
Posts: 105
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The BBC story (link cited on previous page) says:
"Ms Henry has been with Thomas Cook for the past four months employed on a summer contract. "
Judging by some of the postings, she may have been engaged in a task that required special skills and training. This accident was bad enough but could so easily have been fatal or led to permanent disability. Quite apart from the scope for improving safety, one would have thought such tasks should be reserved for trained & experienced permanent employees.
"Ms Henry has been with Thomas Cook for the past four months employed on a summer contract. "
Judging by some of the postings, she may have been engaged in a task that required special skills and training. This accident was bad enough but could so easily have been fatal or led to permanent disability. Quite apart from the scope for improving safety, one would have thought such tasks should be reserved for trained & experienced permanent employees.
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: gatwick
Posts: 109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In response to the last post .... all british airline crew regardless of length of employment are given all the required training in opening and closing doors ..... one could say new crew are far more aware of this than crew with many years service ... and therefore are not so complacent,and carry out procedures to the letter ......clearly you do not work in aviation or you would have known this.
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: LGW
Posts: 107
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Exactly JMC.
Opening and closing doors (both when steps are attached or not) is an everday part of life for UK Cabin Crew, and Im sure international crew as well.
And as you say, new starters are the most current and diligant out of all of us, fresh from SEP/SOP training and hours of opening/closing and dis/arming door drills.
If HKPAX actually worked in the industry he would indeed be aware of that.
But perhaps his username suggests he is a "Pax from HK" as opossed to one of us?!
Opening and closing doors (both when steps are attached or not) is an everday part of life for UK Cabin Crew, and Im sure international crew as well.
And as you say, new starters are the most current and diligant out of all of us, fresh from SEP/SOP training and hours of opening/closing and dis/arming door drills.
If HKPAX actually worked in the industry he would indeed be aware of that.
But perhaps his username suggests he is a "Pax from HK" as opossed to one of us?!
Join Date: Dec 2000
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We have been discussing this same issue and risk within my company for a while now, having had a number of Safety Reports regarding steps being moved without warning and with doors still open. We have seen the number of incidents reduce dramatically following an awareness and auditing campaign, but it does still happen, and the risk is still there.
I would welcome any solutions or ideas! The points made earlier are valid, in that trying to initiate modifications to equipment across multiple stations / handling agents would be virtually impossible....we all struggle to get the basic processes followed consistently in places, letalone something new!
I tend to agree with an earlier post.....if safety mechanisms were built into steps, someone would find a way to bypass them!
I would welcome any solutions or ideas! The points made earlier are valid, in that trying to initiate modifications to equipment across multiple stations / handling agents would be virtually impossible....we all struggle to get the basic processes followed consistently in places, letalone something new!
I tend to agree with an earlier post.....if safety mechanisms were built into steps, someone would find a way to bypass them!
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: n/a
Posts: 1,425
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You would think that a simple hardpoint in the roof by the door and a saftey belt that attaches by carabina (spelling?) would be the cheapest and quickest fix. Put belt on by cc to close/open doors.
Be even easier on the freigher could just attach to the cargo net.
Be even easier on the freigher could just attach to the cargo net.
First and foremost I hope the young lady concerned is not too battered and will be home and fit soon.
Whatever the whys and wherefores of the incident - it was a buggers muddle at CFU that night. I had to wait twenty minutes or so after landing before being allowed to taxi to a parking slot. As my last homebound pax finished boarding, the first outbound bags were being unloaded. Simple fact is, CFU is too busy in the middle of the night with insufficient personnel. Vehicles are driven around the pan at ridiculous speeds - no wonder that corners are cut and accidents happen regardless of the circumstances of the incident in question.
Whatever the whys and wherefores of the incident - it was a buggers muddle at CFU that night. I had to wait twenty minutes or so after landing before being allowed to taxi to a parking slot. As my last homebound pax finished boarding, the first outbound bags were being unloaded. Simple fact is, CFU is too busy in the middle of the night with insufficient personnel. Vehicles are driven around the pan at ridiculous speeds - no wonder that corners are cut and accidents happen regardless of the circumstances of the incident in question.
Hmmmyeah
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Leopardess.
Posts: 652
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A quick comparison if I may to a safety assessment I conducted recently for the construction industry.
Construction (Not 'law', but advised and mostly observed):
Any leading edge/working platform over 1.1 metres (yes, only about 4 feet!) above ground level to be fitted with double guard rails.
Where this is not possible physical barriers must be situated to protect the area and all operatives working on the unprotected side must wear approved fall arrest devices.
Use of step ladders of any height (or rather lack of) not generally allowed.
Aviation:
Well, this accident tells the sad story, nothing. Even at many times the height where the construction 'rules' begin to apply.
The construction industry is plagued by fatalities and 75% of these are due to falls.
Falls from aircraft are fortunately rare.
However the fact that falls from aircraft are few does not remove the risk.
Sadly as with many safety issues it seems it's a numbers game; when an unacceptable number of people are injured or worse then, and only then, is something done.
In my opinion it is an unacceptable risk to expose crew members to. A grab handle does not constitute 'protection'.
Simple fall restraints are readily available, would not be costly to provide or time consuming to use. The only additional item required being a suitably strong point near the door to clip onto.
Obviously only the lowest level of protection offered by a belt (as opposed to a harness) would be practical but would be sufficient to prevent a fall.
It shocks me that even the notoriously unsafe construction industry appear to be taking more care of their operatives than the highly safety orientated aviation industry over the issue of falls from heights.
I don't believe it's considered acceptable to expose employees to a fall risk such as this in any other industry.
Construction (Not 'law', but advised and mostly observed):
Any leading edge/working platform over 1.1 metres (yes, only about 4 feet!) above ground level to be fitted with double guard rails.
Where this is not possible physical barriers must be situated to protect the area and all operatives working on the unprotected side must wear approved fall arrest devices.
Use of step ladders of any height (or rather lack of) not generally allowed.
Aviation:
Well, this accident tells the sad story, nothing. Even at many times the height where the construction 'rules' begin to apply.
The construction industry is plagued by fatalities and 75% of these are due to falls.
Falls from aircraft are fortunately rare.
However the fact that falls from aircraft are few does not remove the risk.
Sadly as with many safety issues it seems it's a numbers game; when an unacceptable number of people are injured or worse then, and only then, is something done.
In my opinion it is an unacceptable risk to expose crew members to. A grab handle does not constitute 'protection'.
Simple fall restraints are readily available, would not be costly to provide or time consuming to use. The only additional item required being a suitably strong point near the door to clip onto.
Obviously only the lowest level of protection offered by a belt (as opposed to a harness) would be practical but would be sufficient to prevent a fall.
It shocks me that even the notoriously unsafe construction industry appear to be taking more care of their operatives than the highly safety orientated aviation industry over the issue of falls from heights.
I don't believe it's considered acceptable to expose employees to a fall risk such as this in any other industry.
Fireflybob
Quite right and the runway as bumpy as ever - funny how the Turks manage to find enough people to load, clean, re-fuel and the greeks do not. Despite Turkish immigration bureaucracy I wonder who deserves a tourist industry more ?
Quite right and the runway as bumpy as ever - funny how the Turks manage to find enough people to load, clean, re-fuel and the greeks do not. Despite Turkish immigration bureaucracy I wonder who deserves a tourist industry more ?
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Manchester
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CFU at night is most unpleasent. The obligatory stack for 15-30 minutes, "follow me" is never available and you can guarentee we'll end up in the hold shepherding the baggage guys once the homeward PAX are boarded.
Scourge of Bad Airline Management!
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Global Nomad
Age: 55
Posts: 1,093
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wishing Ms Henry a speedy recovery and a rapid return to flying. The drop to the ground on a 757 must be a looong way... glad to hear that she is not more badly injured (cf, the captain who fell from a 737 at NCL(?) a few months back - how is he now, anyone know?)
There seems to be waaaaay too many incidents like this. HSE, are you listening??
TA
There seems to be waaaaay too many incidents like this. HSE, are you listening??
TA