Spanair accident at Madrid

[justme69]

Oh, sure, we can agree on that. Just tell me a short way of referring to it and it will be fine. Line up and vacate sounds good.

Let me remind everyone, though, that most of the time I'm just translating what the press says and using their words, in which case, I have not much of a choice but to speak of nonsense (you wouldn't imagine how much I read about the RAT having to do with heating the engines so they don't freeze on the air ...). Also, as you know, I have no experience in anything relating to airplanes/airlines/airports, other than being a somewhat frequent international flyer.

[HarryMann]

Justme69

Thanks for posting that articulate account of the news so far!

[Rananim]

Also, as you know, I have no experience in anything relating to airplanes/airlines/airports, other than being a somewhat frequent international flyer.

That doesnt matter.Your contributions have been important.An open forum means more clutter but usually pays dividends in the long run.

Returning to checklist discipline,perhaps we could discuss:
a)In your airline,does the skipper always call for takeoff flaps or does the First Officer select it without asking?
b)If the SOP was for the skipper to call it but your First Officer kept jumping the gun,would you let it go or insist on the SOP?
c)If takeoff flaps are delayed due icing/not all engines running due congestion/perf data still missing, what provisions do you make to ensure that the checklist is not forgotten?Brief it(oral reminder)?Or does it need a visual reminder(checklist partiallly withdrawn from its jacket)?Do you think either work?
d)How often do you find yourself responding to a checklist in a rote fashion.You say it before actually looking .I wont ask if you say it and dont look........
e)Do you believe in the challenge/response methodology unequivocally?If so,and the company/manufacturer SOP doesnt,how do you deal with that?
f)You're in a bit of a rush for whatever reason..Your colleague starts responding to his/her own challenges and then stows the checklist..do you
-say nothing
-make a visual check to confirm it
-ask for the checklist again and delay takeoff or GA
g)The way in which you execute a checklist(disciplined vs relaxed anywhichway) actually has no bearing on your propensity to actually forget to call for the checklist.True or False?

My own responses would be:
a)Skipper always calls it.
b)I'd insist.
c)I'd do both and pray to the good Lord that they work.
d)Guilty.Engage brain,then speak.
e)Yes.I would enforce it regardless,except one or two minor checklists.
f)Ask again.I have made a visual scan to confirm but I know its wrong.
g)I am sure theres a strong connection between the two.False

[411A]

If takeoff flaps are delayed due icing/not all engines running due congestion/perf data still missing, what provisions do you make to ensure that the checklist is not forgotten?Brief it(oral reminder)?Or does it need a visual reminder(checklist partiallly withdrawn from its jacket)?Do you think either work?

Our company...as the very last item on the before takeoff checklist.

Configuration check.
Flaps/slats
Stab trim
Speedbrake lever
Compasses compared and agree with the runway heading.

Having been originally trained at PanAmerican very long ago, that's the way they did it, and I do the same...always.

Better safe than sorry.

Give it a try....you might find my suggestion useful.

[sevenstrokeroll]

for many years I think we have been doing checklists in the wrong manner.

Why, do we do the most important checklist while taxiing? Why not stop, set the brake and do the taxi/before takeoff checklist?

I like to do most of the descent/before landing cheklist before we leave FL180.

Only the most basic checklist for landing should be done around the outer marker.

And it is better to set some flaps, while waiting for takeoff data then not to have set anything. Most guys know their airports and planes well enough to have a good guess about flap settings.


We must go beyond human failings and make sure things work right (correctly)

[philipat]

Waste Lakes:

Now this is a forum and has no regulatory powers or influence, so perhaps the proponents of these ideas would be better spending their time writing to the international regulatory bodies and making their case to them.

Very clever but no need. The lawyers will do this so we can save the cost of the mail. I would also take the bet offered in an earlier post that within 2 years, after the lawyers are done, MAD WILL change the terrain between the runways. Put it in Outlook and check back in 2010. Legacy fields such as LHR cannot realistically be changed in the light of unrealistic cost/benefit issues, but fields such as Barajas can and will. Lawyers will ensure that the cost/benefit calculations make it viable. Preliminary estimates of damages suggest it already is

[philipat]

Trims.Flaps.Spoillers

Our company...as the very last item on the before takeoff checklist.

Configuration check.
Flaps/slats
Stab trim
Speedbrake lever
Compasses compared and agree with the runway heading.

This seems to make total sense to me. I had suggested in an earlier post that this final check be formalised because, for reasons of good airmanship, many if not all experienced pilots do this final check of potential killers one last time for the wife and kids anyway.
PJ2, for whom I have great respect, argued convincingly, however, that the existing SOP's were already adequate. But it does still seem illogical to me that this check of potential killers is not the final pre-TO check, especially since the intuitive behaviour of experienced pilots (aka "airmanship") suggests it should be. Or, as another post has put it, why are the most important checks performed during taxi and not immediately before TO?

[Sleeping Freight Dog]

This caught my eye, The plane backed up from parking stand 11 to
proceed to the ramp. Did the plane engage reverse thrust to get out of the
parking stand??? or was it pushed back by a tug?? Most DC9 and MD80s can
actually back up from a gate or ramp by themselves using reverse thrust.
We know one of the thrusters was locked out, but it usually only takes one
to move the jet back from a gate area.

[kenparry]

SFD

As far as I know, power-back is never used in Europe. In all my time here, it's always been done with a tug.

[rogerg]

You should never say "never". I have done it 3 times in in the UK though it is not normal.

[justme69]

Here are more witnesses testimonials, of course all of them subjective and probably innacurate. This is my personnal summary of the most important bits of information, which pretty much corroborates other witnesses:

-Someone pulled weather info as soon as he found out about the accident
LEMD 201600Z 23004KT CAVOK 31/M00 Q1017 NOSIG=
METAR LEMD 201530Z 23005KT 180V340 CAVOK 31/M01 Q1017 NOSIG=
LEMD 201430Z 24006G19KT 170V340 CAVOK 30/02 Q1017 NOSIG=

-A worker claims to have been on north side of T4S, where the SAT building ends, aprox. near parking 512-516, on EPA north where the IB dollys/stairs/luggage trucks are. He says he thought it was weird the MD was using as much runaway as an A-340. Soon after it took off some 50m high, it rolled left, then corrected to the right, but it fell like if it had stalled, the wing touched the ground and it crawled for some 500m until it went into a (small) "forest" and exploded on a big fireball. Answering some questions he specifically says: I don't think any of the "turns" (rolls) were "brutal" (too excessive). They were smooth, but on the roll to the right, I saw that the right wing touched the ground 3-5 seconds and then it "stabilized" with the bottom touching the ground and crawling on it for that 500m. He had not been contacted by the investigation commission at the time of writing (2 days after the accident).


Another rescue worker said:

-First signs of impact at aprox. the same level as PAPI marks of 18R, about 30m away from the runaway, marks from back landing gear, marks of right wing touching the ground for some 10 meters, followed by front wheel gears that bounce some 2m to the front and from then on all wheels remain on the ground. For about 500m the plane seems to have rolled on the ground quite intact, with only the back part of the plane missing (the one that differenciates MD's from DC9's), an engine cover, and nothing else. Some 500m later it hits a barrier and leaves the ground, due to the gap in terrain level, another 400m aprox. and hits the "forest". I would guess by the location of the pieces that it finally landed "upside-down". On the terrain it was impressive that from the place where it touched ground at first until the final landing zone it was some 1km away. But I insist that the MD didn't start to break down until it hit the barrier after about 500m of uncontrolled rolling on the ground by the runaway. The engines were in the whereabouts of the rest of the parts, that is, they didn't detach much earlier on.

[JM340]

Justme69, check times on the METARs you give or collect from someone else... Again people mix up Z time with local time at Madrid. METAR should be from 1230z aprox.
The correct wx report was stated I think 1000 posts ago.

Saludos

JM

[Roy Bouchier]

Final Checks

As 411a says:
Configuration check.
Flaps/slats
Stab trim
Speedbrake lever
Compasses compared and agree with the runway heading.

I normally followed this with "And what have we forgotten today, gentlemen?"

[grebllaw123d]

Correct weather info

JM340 and justme69,

For info, the correct weather information relevant to the accident was given in post #110:

"The METAR history leading up to the accident (1245z) as follows:

LEMD 201300Z 14004KT CAVOK 29/03 Q1018 NOSIG=
LEMD 201230Z 18007KT 090V240 CAVOK 28/02 Q1018 NOSIG=
LEMD 201200Z 35002KT CAVOK 28/06 Q1019 NOSIG=
LEMD 201130Z 16005KT CAVOK 27/08 Q1019 NOSIG=
LEMD 201100Z 17002KT CAVOK 26/09 Q1019 NOSIG="

The accident happened at 1245Z or 1445 local - reported in the official SAS Group statement (post#109).

[777fly]

I have to comment in support of Rainboe, 411a and Nigel on Draft. As carefully trained and checked professional airmen/women, we are given responsibility and the ability to safely operate our aircraft, on a daily basis, without technical input from the cabin. The ability to do that is at no time more evident than when just 2 pilots ferry an empty B744 around the skies for air-test or maintenance. Our ability to operate is not at all dependent upon input from the CC but, as indicated elsewhere, they are useful eyes and ears in the cabin and their concerns, even if unfounded, should not be ignored. However, the 2 posts from quartermilltopo and Desk Jockey only serve to show how flight regularity and even safety, due to distraction, might be compromised by false cries of alarm from untrained and ill-informed observers.
It seems that many posters here are unaware that it is the failure to set the SLATS for takeoff that is lethal.As observed, the A300 often uses no FLAP for takeoff, but I am not aware of any large commercial transport that does not deploy SLAT (or LE devices) for takeoff. It is extremely difficult, on some types, to determine by observation from the cabin if the slats or low angle flaps are selected, even in good viewing conditions.
At the end of the day, it is strict checklist discipline which will ensure that all is correctly set, particularly under stressful circumstances away from the norm, such as a taxi back and return for takeoff.
On my current type and with my current airline, but also with 2 previous operators, we are not permitted to commence taxy without the slats and flaps being selected first. They are selected as part of the 'after start' procedure, prior to brake release. Some operators even have a FDR 'event' marker triggered if this procedure is not followed. A further back-up is that the ECL ( electronic checklist, for SLF) will not allow the takeoff checklist to progress to completion until the takeoff configuration is correct. This is an excellent safety measure which prevents misconfiguration should the flap/slat deployment have to be delayed in icing conditions, or get forgotten for any reason. Perhaps all aircraft should have this technique and ECL as SOP.
The ultimate backstop is a check as suggested by 411A. We used to call it a 'seniority check'. Mine is flaps/slats, trim, power setting, speeds.

[Desk Jockey]

Please report further....

However, the 2 posts from quartermilltopo and Desk Jockey only serve to show how flight regularity and even safety, due to distraction, might be compromised by false cries of alarm from untrained and ill-informed observers.

I take it you refer to Airbus T/O with flaps at 0 and not aircraft lining up with pitot cover on?

[777fly]

Desk Jockey: Read the posts. The Airbus can takeoff with FLAPS 0. The SLAT is what matters. The aircraft with the pitot cover on was not going for takeoff, it was an engineering ground positioning. Correct me if I am wrong, its been a long day........

[wes_wall]

Looks like the airline will turn turtle, unless Iberia comes to the rescue. News reporting bad day at black rock.

[n736ff]

On the runway I was taught to say "OK-killer items again"

[philipat]

SAS

wes wall:

Looks like the airline will turn turtle, unless Iberia comes to the rescue. News reporting bad day at black rock.

I agree with the conclusion, especially now that US lawyers are involved. Remember, however, that Spanair is controlled by SAS who have been trying to offload it for some time. Can't see that Iberia, which has its own issues and is the subject of attention from BA, would have any interest whatsoever. Especially in view of the potential liability and when the likely outcome for Spanair will result in less competition for Iberia.