Airbus power loss report
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Kent
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Airbus power loss report
Official report into loss of electrical power on a BA A319 says incident was 'serious', though most systems restored after just 90 seconds.
Flight was out of LHR to Budapest, Oct 22, 2005.
Both primary flight displays and navigation displays went blank, VHF and intercom inoperative, most cockpit lighting out and cabin lights out momentarily, according to AAIB.
76 pax, 6 crew, no reports of terror, flames or dropped books.
Crew heard a "clunk" and flight deck became very dark as Airbus was approaching 20,000ft
Captain used night horizon for ref. Standby instruments were "difficult to see in the poor light", natch.
After discussions between crew and BA maintenance, plane continued to Budapest. AAIB said: "It was not possible to determine the cause of the incident due to a lack of available evidence."
But nine safety recommendations were made in addition to four made in a special AAIB bulletin in 2006.
Crew had not received formal training on how to operate this type of Airbus by sole reference to standby instruments.
The (non-BA) engineer in Budapest did not investigate the incident, which was reported to him verbally by captain and was in the air safety report.
The tech log reflected "minor defects" and the faxed copy of the air safety report was not received by BA’s flight ops safety department or the department responsible for entering the incident on electronic safety management database. This meant the significance of the incident was not fully understood until the original copy of the ASR arrived at Heathrow by post.
So, job done by crew but I'd certainly have wanted someone to find out what caused a 90-secs power loss
Flight was out of LHR to Budapest, Oct 22, 2005.
Both primary flight displays and navigation displays went blank, VHF and intercom inoperative, most cockpit lighting out and cabin lights out momentarily, according to AAIB.
76 pax, 6 crew, no reports of terror, flames or dropped books.
Crew heard a "clunk" and flight deck became very dark as Airbus was approaching 20,000ft
Captain used night horizon for ref. Standby instruments were "difficult to see in the poor light", natch.
After discussions between crew and BA maintenance, plane continued to Budapest. AAIB said: "It was not possible to determine the cause of the incident due to a lack of available evidence."
But nine safety recommendations were made in addition to four made in a special AAIB bulletin in 2006.
Crew had not received formal training on how to operate this type of Airbus by sole reference to standby instruments.
The (non-BA) engineer in Budapest did not investigate the incident, which was reported to him verbally by captain and was in the air safety report.
The tech log reflected "minor defects" and the faxed copy of the air safety report was not received by BA’s flight ops safety department or the department responsible for entering the incident on electronic safety management database. This meant the significance of the incident was not fully understood until the original copy of the ASR arrived at Heathrow by post.
So, job done by crew but I'd certainly have wanted someone to find out what caused a 90-secs power loss
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Surrounded by aluminum, and the great outdoors
Posts: 3,780
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
well of all the kinds of airplanes I've flown..(most older than me), the 320 has the most "unusual" flt deck lighting...with head knockers for table lights, and some others poached off of VW busses rusting away in some silent graveyard..the periscope lights on the 767 were well thought out...with all the brilliant technology the 320 has to offer with it's automation....why is the lighting so poor..(for us old farts)???
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Posts: 100
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This incident happened in 2005, has this issue ever happened since?
Was it really the best option to continue? Surely get the issue, more importantly the cause, established and rectified asap before it happened again possibly for a longer period or permanently during the latter stages of the flight.
Was it really the best option to continue? Surely get the issue, more importantly the cause, established and rectified asap before it happened again possibly for a longer period or permanently during the latter stages of the flight.
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Cheshire, England
Posts: 96
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
back in 2000/2001 I was working onboard an A330 from SFB - MAN when a power loss occurred, which was very brief and due to being a night flight hardly anyone in cabin noticed.
Flight deck said they had not experienced it before and had no explanation, no faults logged or anything.
Is it possible in todays computer driven world that such problems are almost ignored and people are not overly concerned as most believe you can simply reset a computer and everything will be fine?
Flight deck said they had not experienced it before and had no explanation, no faults logged or anything.
Is it possible in todays computer driven world that such problems are almost ignored and people are not overly concerned as most believe you can simply reset a computer and everything will be fine?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Kent
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I know it's all part of the job to deal with irritations and crises but alarm bells should ring when pilot is using a night-time horizon for reference, the No.2 is struggling to find switches in the dark and no one has bothered to train either chap for such a scenario.
Decision to continue flight was made after discussions between crew and BA maintenance bods but, as AAIB said there wasn't enough evidence to work out what had gone wrong, I'd like to know what was said in the discussions that was so reassuring.
Decision to continue flight was made after discussions between crew and BA maintenance bods but, as AAIB said there wasn't enough evidence to work out what had gone wrong, I'd like to know what was said in the discussions that was so reassuring.
Paxing All Over The World
As a pax, this statement:
surprised me so much that I said some very rude words.
Could someone tell me that is is normal/OK/regular for the FC not to know how to use (what sounds like) the last option of instruments? If this is normal and it's just that I don't know it - fine. If it's not normal, shouldn't someone have slapped the airline on the wrist?
Crew had not received formal training on how to operate this type of Airbus by sole reference to standby instruments.
Could someone tell me that is is normal/OK/regular for the FC not to know how to use (what sounds like) the last option of instruments? If this is normal and it's just that I don't know it - fine. If it's not normal, shouldn't someone have slapped the airline on the wrist?
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: England
Posts: 1,389
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Heathrow
Posts: 291
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is what the report says on training to fly by standby instruments:
"1.5.3.2 Pilot training on standby instruments
Neither pilot could recollect having received any specific training on flight
with sole reference to the standby instruments during the period they had been
operating A320 family aircraft.
The investigation team were informed by Airbus that on the company’s own
initial type training courses, pilots are not given any training on how to fly the
aircraft by sole reference to the standby instruments. This is considered by
Airbus to be a basic flying skill that all pilots should already possess and thus,
in Airbus’s opinion, does not require special training."
and a recommendation:
4.5 Safety Recommendation 2007-062: It is recommended that the European
Aviation Safety Authority should, in consultation with other National
Airworthiness Authorities outside Europe, consider requiring training for flight
by sole reference to standby instruments for pilots during initial and recurrent
training courses.
"1.5.3.2 Pilot training on standby instruments
Neither pilot could recollect having received any specific training on flight
with sole reference to the standby instruments during the period they had been
operating A320 family aircraft.
The investigation team were informed by Airbus that on the company’s own
initial type training courses, pilots are not given any training on how to fly the
aircraft by sole reference to the standby instruments. This is considered by
Airbus to be a basic flying skill that all pilots should already possess and thus,
in Airbus’s opinion, does not require special training."
and a recommendation:
4.5 Safety Recommendation 2007-062: It is recommended that the European
Aviation Safety Authority should, in consultation with other National
Airworthiness Authorities outside Europe, consider requiring training for flight
by sole reference to standby instruments for pilots during initial and recurrent
training courses.
