Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Rumours & News
Reload this Page >

Ryanair incident Ciampino.

Rumours & News Reporting Points that may affect our jobs or lives as professional pilots. Also, items that may be of interest to professional pilots.

Ryanair incident Ciampino.

Old 14th Nov 2008, 14:51
  #301 (permalink)  
FR-
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: MIA-IBZ
Posts: 563
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I dont understand why the cabin crew told pax to stay seated. From the pictures i have seen the crew should have started the evacution without the Capt say so.

Interesting
FR- is offline  
Old 14th Nov 2008, 15:24
  #302 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Ireland
Posts: 627
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Temporary loss of thrust it may be but both engines losing thrust however temporary on short finals is as good a reason as any to put it down sharpish.
corsair is offline  
Old 14th Nov 2008, 16:36
  #303 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 2,044
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
From the pictures i have seen the crew should of started the evacution without the Capt say so.
Expand please? Certainly in our outfit the CC would be 100% correct not to order an Evac, and incorrect to order one.

Are you referring to the specific Ryanair rules?

NoD
NigelOnDraft is offline  
Old 14th Nov 2008, 17:01
  #304 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Somewhere
Age: 56
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Nigelondraft,

You would be correct, Ryanair cabin crew, are allowed to order an evacuation, with structual damage, if there is no response from the flight deck, and if they believe, the flight crew may be severlely injured or dead.

It is intended, I believe, more for a break up, or crash.

In this instance, IF, the aircraft, came to a halt, with gear in tact, their SOP's would prevent them from ordering it.

They would be standing by for the Captains announcement.
BottyTotty is offline  
Old 15th Nov 2008, 08:00
  #305 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: UK
Age: 54
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Bird Control Program

Does Italy have a bird control policy in place, around the airports? If they did, perhaps this incident may have been averted. Just a thought...
Capt_Tech is offline  
Old 15th Nov 2008, 18:01
  #306 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: the dark side
Posts: 1,043
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Snoop

Capt Tech
Does Italy have a bird control policy in place, around the airports?
Yes

If they did, perhaps this incident may have been averted. Just a thought...
So you've made your mind up they don't then, see above. Can I presume you've not visited the BCU at CIA? Just a thought ...
jumpseater is offline  
Old 15th Nov 2008, 20:41
  #307 (permalink)  
MOLWillie
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
From the hard rub on the aft fuse to the folded leg, it appears to be excessive control input in my eyeballs. Smooth moves are easier on the 'tin'.
 
Old 15th Nov 2008, 20:46
  #308 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Northampton
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I dont believe it, comments on the pilots ability from someone who knows nothing about the situation the guys found themselves in!!
rogerg is offline  
Old 15th Nov 2008, 20:58
  #309 (permalink)  
FR-
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: MIA-IBZ
Posts: 563
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Please dont tell about FR cabin crew SEP, I know the manual inside out. I spend several months a year teaching it to new potential cabin crew. From the pictures it is clear the crew would of been allowed start an evacuation. If you look back at my past posts I did copy from the manual the 6 times crew can start the evacation without the Capts command.
FR- is offline  
Old 15th Nov 2008, 21:30
  #310 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 2,044
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
FR-

If you look back at my past posts I did copy from the manual the 6 times crew can start the evacation without the Capts command.
Indeed you did:
When Cabin Crew Can Initiate the Evacuation.

Cabin Crew can initiate the evacuation when the situation is CLEARLY CATASROPHIC.
These situations are:
1. An obvious self-sustaining major fire either inside or outside the aircraft.
2. Dense smoke in the cabin
3. An unusually exaggerated nose-down, tail-down or wing-down attitude, where remaining on board could cause injury or death.
4. Sounds which would indicate the breaking up of the aircraft.
5. Ditching e.g. landing in water.
6. The flight crew becoming incapacitated.
The area I have put in Bold you highlighted.

I am curious which applied? Item 3 refers to "An unusually exaggerated ... attitude where remaining on board could cause injury or death". Are you saying the slight wing-down attitude applies here? I am not CC, so am curious as to where this attiude could be seen to <<could cause injury or death.>>

It is not a "criticism" or "disagreement", just asking the question? We have been through this issue in the company I work for and recently "tightened up" the circumstances. Prior us doing this, the FR rules you quote were more sensible than ours IMHO Ours are now somewhat more direct, and simpler...

NoD
NigelOnDraft is offline  
Old 16th Nov 2008, 05:53
  #311 (permalink)  
FR-
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: MIA-IBZ
Posts: 563
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Well the wing was also touching the floor, for all the cabin crew know it could be a fuel leak, possible fire . . . .many different things, we are not pilots. But that is clearly a wing down attitude. And if i was flying i would of got off my jump seat and open my door. One thing i will say about FR is that it always puts safety first.

On a different note, i still wonder why the crew of the clr-lig crew didnt jump with the pax.
FR- is offline  
Old 16th Nov 2008, 06:07
  #312 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Thailand
Posts: 942
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The policy of allowing CC to initiate an evacuation based on the above criterii(um?) will remain in place until the following happens;

On a dark, wet and windy night a take off will be rejected at high speed due to engine failure with fire. Aircraft will yaw fairly dramatically, decelerate extremely rapidly, lots of noise from the reverser, juddering brakes on the anti-skid and eventually coming to a sudden stop. The impression might well be that the attitude is now not correct after all that drama!

CC will observe flames and smoke outside the aircraft, hear nothing from the cockpit and order the evacuation on the side away from the fire.

So far, so good and all according to SOPs.

Except that on the side away from the fire the engine is still running! The rear chute is blown off the door by the idle thrust from the engine and the Fwd chute goes down the intake and helps stop the engine. It all goes dim/dark and far from quiet as 160 pax begin screaming and shouting.

The pilots are correctly going through the engine fire/failure drill, as directed by SOPs and have completed the part where they put the Start lever(singular) to cut-off when the CC begin the evacuation.

Indeed, every member of crew on board has been following the company SOPs and the result is a clusterfook of the highest order.

No matter how many times I have brought this situation up at recurrent training, no-one has done anything about it. It will have to happen as written before anyone actually changes anything.

But I am soon to retire and have begun to care less that middle management is increasingly populated by yes men, fence dwellers and boat stabilisers.

Happy landings!
rubik101 is offline  
Old 16th Nov 2008, 06:16
  #313 (permalink)  
FR-
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: MIA-IBZ
Posts: 563
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
LOL thats actually funny, a veer off the runway/rejected take off is one of the most asked breifing questions.
Anyway SOP and SEP are totally different in FR. If it would help I can copy the SEP for a veer of the runway but I feel it is side tracking.

Rejected Take-off
The captain may decide to reject a take-off for various reasons. These may
include conditions either inside or outside the aircraft, which could affect the safe
operation of the flight.
e.g. technical problem, birds/animals on the runway, pilot incapacitation.
Once the aircraft has come to a complete stop the CSS picks up the interphone
and call the Captain and says "
Cabin to Flight Deck, No 1 standing by"
No 2 picks up aft interphone and listens.
(As the flight crew are extremely busy doing their own rejected take off drill
there may be a time delay before the Captain answers the call.)
While the CSS is on the interphone the crew will be assessing the situation
inside and outside the cabin for any potential hazards.
Any information the Pax give is vital as they have a better view of outside the
aircraft. If neccessary give the Captain any relevant information.
The Captain will then give the CSS instructions.
All cabin crew must remain at their assigned stations.
The CSS will advise the Pax to remain seated. An explanation for the rejected
take off will be given when time permits.
In a rejected take off where the aircraft veers off the runway all cabin crew must
shout the command "
Head Down, Grab Ankles" and await Captains command.
If it is necessary to evacuate the aircraft the command would be "
This is an

emergency, evacuate the aircraft using all available exits
"

Last edited by Jetdriver; 16th Nov 2008 at 11:15.
FR- is offline  
Old 16th Nov 2008, 08:07
  #314 (permalink)  
Per Ardua ad Astraeus
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 18,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Rubik - may I suggest our company's SOP which is a call on the PA from the flight deck after stopping 'Cabin Crew and passengers remain seated'?

Obviously over-ridden by the call for an urgent evacuation, but it lets the c/c know that the pilots are ASSESSING the situation. As you point out there is a VERY HIGH probability that at least one engine is still running at this point and therefore it is VITAL that a knee-jerk evacuation order from the c/crew is NOT made UNLESS they are CERTAIN the pilots are 'out of it', and then they need to be aware of any engines still running. It should be born in mind that a lot of 'stops' may well be precautionary and the a/c may well then taxy off the runway under its own power.

Another classic example - which is a good CRM refresh topic - is an over-run, down a slope, into an obstacle, both pilots now injured and unconscious - and probably BOTH engines running.
BOAC is offline  
Old 16th Nov 2008, 08:27
  #315 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 2,044
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Well the wing was also touching the floor,
Really? All the pics I see show a slight L wing low attitude with the Left Engine on the ground? Which part of which wing was touching the floor?
for all the cabin crew know it could be a fuel leak, possible fire . . . .
Agree... but I see nothing in those criteria for CC to consider such matters. The criteria are clearly laid out for the situation you currently face. If something changes, then reassess against the criteria...
many different things, we are not pilots. But that is clearly a wing down attitude.
Yes it is. But I might counter that it is not An unusually exaggerated .... wing-down attitude and that where remaining on board could cause injury or death did not apply.
And if i was flying i would of got off my jump seat and open my door.
It frightens me to hear you say that
One thing i will say about FR is that it always puts safety first.
Fine - but which airline does not?

The curious thing about this discussion is that, despite you saying you are Ryanair (?) Cabin Crew (?) Trainer (?) and that they should have evacuated on thier own initiative, it would appear the crew on the day did not?

To echo other posters, on many aircraft types, if the CC evacuate with the engines still running, you are very likely to kill passengers in a horrible way If the Flt Crew are still concious and able to communicate, it is almost certainly better to await their decisions - which will likely be based partially on the reports from the CC.

As above, in my company, the CC Initiated Evacuation criteria have been recently tightened up... and a good thing I would say too. The ones you quote are fairly clear, but in my opinion need to be followed exactly as written... if one starts interpreting them to mean what might happen, then their true purpose becomes lost

Not intending this to be an argument, just each learn from the others' viewpoints

NoD
NigelOnDraft is offline  
Old 16th Nov 2008, 10:29
  #316 (permalink)  
Per Ardua ad Astraeus
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 18,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Clandestino - would you dismiss the BA038 thread from the competition, then?
BOAC is offline  
Old 16th Nov 2008, 12:08
  #317 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: W of 30W
Posts: 1,939
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Anyone to know how far the tail strike marks are from the threshold ?
CONF iture is offline  
Old 17th Nov 2008, 11:07
  #318 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Exit stage right.
Posts: 289
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
just as a foot note to all those whom think than ryanair flies every where on fumes, we as a normal course of operating, tanker on nearly 50% of our flights, hardly min fuel now is it.
Could you explain what Tankering is.....think I understand but prefer to be clear.
racedo is offline  
Old 17th Nov 2008, 11:29
  #319 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Northampton
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
tanker on nearly 50% of our flights, hardly min fuel now is it.
Could be on the way back!
rogerg is offline  
Old 17th Nov 2008, 11:32
  #320 (permalink)  
YYZ
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: UAE
Posts: 662
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Taking into cosideration WX, runway etc, FR has the policy to tanker when the fuel is cheaper where ever possible.

EG, normally at a home base airport the fuel prices are cheaper, therefore it makes more sense to take as much fuel as possible there so to minimise the uplift at the destination airport where it is more expensive.

And in reply to above, It was an aircraft from Hahn so should have been tankering?


YYZ
YYZ is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information

Copyright © 2023 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.