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

UA landing at Newark

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

UA landing at Newark

Old 12th Jan 2010, 23:01
  #41 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: U.K.
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Hornet,

The slides may not "compensate" for an aeroplane on its side but Airbus says that in such an event all slides will be useful i.e. they will reach the ground. Of course the ones on the "high" side will be much steeper and the cabin crew may have difficulty in climbing up to the door to open it (as will the pax) but it can be used successfully. As shown in the photos, the engine will contact the ground first not the wingtip. As regards emergency evacuation or not? It's the old story, you're damned if you do and you're damned if you don't. That's what we get paid the megabucks for - not for watching the autopilot fly the darn thing at 390!!

Well done to this crew- all of them. Another well-trained professional crew doing what needed to be done when it became necessary. I hope I would do as well if it happened to me. Congratulations -and now for the paperwork!
Jim Croche is offline  
Old 12th Jan 2010, 23:17
  #42 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: fairly close to the colonial capitol
Age: 55
Posts: 1,693
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
surprised he hasn't suggested hanging the FO by his/her suspenders out the door midflight and bashing the gear door down so problem resolved. Sure he or Steven Seagal has done this before......
We may yet learn about the TriStar's record on gear up landings.
vapilot2004 is offline  
Old 13th Jan 2010, 00:02
  #43 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Georgia, USA
Posts: 454
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
We may yet learn about the TriStar's record on gear up landings.
It's ZERO.
glhcarl is offline  
Old 13th Jan 2010, 00:05
  #44 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: fairly close to the colonial capitol
Age: 55
Posts: 1,693
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
It's ZERO.
You don't say?
vapilot2004 is offline  
Old 13th Jan 2010, 00:52
  #45 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Toronto
Posts: 2,558
Received 38 Likes on 17 Posts
Slow vs. Fast Evacuation

As long as there's no smoke or fuel leaks and the CFR are there with nozzles at the ready, I would lean to being choosy as to which slides to use, i.e. least likely to cause injuries, and toss off the fit and frantic.

Remember that with the Gimli Glider, the nose gear collapsed or failed to deploy. The rear exit slides hung straight down and a number of people were seriously injured when they basically fell straight down to the concrete.

Then position the frail folks by the best exit(s).

If still no smoke, then there's time to deplane the frail folks by steps.

However if smoke appears, there's fewer people to get off pronto.

Now is there a SOP out there that covers all that?
RatherBeFlying is online now  
Old 13th Jan 2010, 01:20
  #46 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: fairly close to the colonial capitol
Age: 55
Posts: 1,693
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Now is there a SOP out there that covers all that?
It's generally get everyone the hell off the airplane. Injured and infirm first if possible.


Oh, and crew leaves last, depending on airline.
vapilot2004 is offline  
Old 13th Jan 2010, 02:36
  #47 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: On a good day - at sea
Posts: 263
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Calling for stairs would be rather unconventional.

The chance for ground crew misunderstanding the request could pose an significant risk. How many would they bring? What doors would they position them at? Would the stairs work at the rear door when the tail is on the ground? Would they work at the front? Would the ground crew running the stairs be able to communicate effectively with the cabin crew? CFR would be put in an unconventional situation they probably haven't trained for all that much and they'd have extra risks thrown at them at the last minute. A few passengers would likely get nervous and start panicking. A few might pop the slides rather that wait to get out the door. (This has happenned several times that I can recall) That would accelerate the panic. People would likely get hurt in the melee.

And what if a fire were to actually break out before or during the stairs positioning. It would have been an easily avoidable disaster had the slides been used from the get go.

All in all, in this kind of situation, even without fire, I'd think it imuch less risky to stick with what everybody knows, expects and trains for - the slides.
nnc0 is offline  
Old 13th Jan 2010, 02:42
  #48 (permalink)  
Person Of Interest
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Keystone Heights, Florida
Age: 68
Posts: 842
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Well, PTH flew with Sully...wonder if Sully remembered it...oh, that's right, stairs weren't available in the middle of the Hudson...

Remind me never to fly with PTH if that's his attitude on evacuation after an ACCIDENT....
DownIn3Green is offline  
Old 13th Jan 2010, 04:03
  #49 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: fairly close to the colonial capitol
Age: 55
Posts: 1,693
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Have I missed anyone?

After seeing this post from our Mr. DownIn3Green, I decided a review was in order of other possible persons of interest in this particular thread.

So far I have:
two green one prayer, ironbutt57, Flightmech, and groundbum.
vapilot2004 is offline  
Old 13th Jan 2010, 05:24
  #50 (permalink)  
PJ2
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: BC
Age: 76
Posts: 2,484
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by protectthehornet
it is often said that the evacuation will probably end up hurting more people than anything else.

wondering, why, an airport as well equippped as newark, the captain elected to use the slides.

portable stairs should have been the first choice in a non time critical situation...plenty of CFR should have prevented any chance of fire. ,

and,

but the plane didn't catch on fire did it?

CFR was right there

the slides could have been used if things hadn't gone so well.
Wow. "The plane didn't catch fire", so keep the people on board after a gear-up landing with aircraft damage.

Wow.
PJ2 is offline  
Old 13th Jan 2010, 20:05
  #51 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: alameda
Posts: 1,053
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
PJ2

I didn't say keep them on the damaged plane...I said remove them with stairs.

Passenger initiated evacuations have caused injuries and problems (certainly if you don't hear reasonable instructions from the crew...use your best judgement.

down in three green... I guess you don't know that slides can be used as rafts.

nnc0...misunderstandings can happen anywhere...being specific...have two portable stair trucks immediately behind the fire trucks 2/3'rds of the way down the runway...after fire chief checks for fuel leaks, ignition sources, flame, smoke etc and gives the OK...bring stairs to open doors and adjust them for tilted aircraft...have a bus standing by for every 50 passengers.

Some times you really have to think things out in advance...

now...if the fire chief said: fuel leak, fire likely, I would use the slides...and away from the possible fires. if I saw flame, if my crew saw flame...bam...slides and hope for the best.

I would also alert people to any special need passengers...elderly, non ambulatory and the like.

my favorite airliners have internal/dorsal stairs, and main cabin door stairs...these new planes are stripped if you ask me...all for ffuel efficiency.
protectthehornet is offline  
Old 13th Jan 2010, 20:34
  #52 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Germany
Posts: 72
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Oh, and crew leaves last, depending on airline.
Haven't you heard the new evacuation commands???
"Out here!!! - Follow Me!!!"
TheWanderer is offline  
Old 14th Jan 2010, 18:36
  #53 (permalink)  
Person Of Interest
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Keystone Heights, Florida
Age: 68
Posts: 842
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
PTH's Post #51 shows where he's coming from...what a warped thought process....Ignore him...
DownIn3Green is offline  
Old 14th Jan 2010, 19:31
  #54 (permalink)  
PJ2
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: BC
Age: 76
Posts: 2,484
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
DownIn3Green;

It's the captain's decision, period, of course, and she or he knows there will be injuries and perhaps other untoward effects such as evacuating into -28C weather with perhaps blowing snow.

That said, one cannot, at one and the same time, evaluate the damage where the landing has caused damage to the engine cowling and very possibly the engine and pylon structure and then, should fire break out, get the people off in time without raising the risk substantially.

One must accept that if one waits while fire crews arrive, assess the damage, establish communications and report same to the captain and while this is going on fire breaks out and there are severe injuries and/or fatalities, one is going to wear it, (if one survives). Though there would be early signs of fire, flash-over (as illustrated in the Cincinatti DC9 evacuation where 23 died on the ground), is a consideration.

In an accident where the aircraft is damaged, getting out, while not the only option, is the preferred option; the QRHs provide relief for the decision to remain on board but that does not mean such a decision is preferred.

Also, communication is an issue both technically and with language issues. An event occurred in Montreal where the captain spoke only English and the Fire-Rescue crew assessing the airplane spoke only French, leading to delays and heightening the risk.

There are many more issues at hand here than have been raised and subsequently discussed.

PJ2
PJ2 is offline  
Old 14th Jan 2010, 19:45
  #55 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: ici
Posts: 285
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Well as Cabin Crew, if the a/c comes to rest at an abnormal angle, we assess our exits then, evacuate. In 90seconds we would have the cabin evacuated, so thats 30 seconds more than your minute to minute radio contact with the Fire Chief.

Fire breaks out your going to have a lot of fingers pointing at your genius wisdom at sitting everybody on board an a/c thats just scraped its arse up the runway.

Cabin Crew aren't all daft, we know very well that an evacuation is going to injure people. We also know that exits may not be suitable for evacuation due to the lean/angle of the a/c.

We also know that fire and smoke will kill people within the first few breaths.

I'd rather a few broken bones, than an a/c full of KFC.
girtbar is offline  
Old 14th Jan 2010, 19:54
  #56 (permalink)  
PJ2
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: BC
Age: 76
Posts: 2,484
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
girtbar;
Unless you hear "remain seated" from the FD (rejected takeoff, no over-run, etc), the SOPs provide for a cabin-crew-initiated evac, just in case the flight crew is incapacitated or there is an immediate knowledge of danger such as fire, etc. which the cockpit crew can't see or assess. I, like all captains would I'm sure, established those understandings during the pre-flight briefing with the I/C.

No SOPs can replace good judgement and crew coordination. Though there are many commonalities, no two events are the same. Ops Manuals provide such relief by indicating that in such circumstances, SOPs provide trained crews with guidance; their experience carries them the rest of the way - goes for front and back end crews.
PJ2 is offline  
Old 14th Jan 2010, 20:06
  #57 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: loughborough
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Flightglobal has picture and a not very good video at:

PICTURES & VIDEO: Limited damage in gear-up Newark landing

A good job.
davestewart is offline  
Old 14th Jan 2010, 21:02
  #58 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: The No Transgression Zone
Posts: 2,483
Received 5 Likes on 3 Posts
yeah lets just break everyones neck,,...for no reason ,..I agree with PTH,... I can't believe the dissention


EVAC decisions are just a bit more complicated than that

maybe I'm not reading things correctly ,..please clarify
Pugilistic Animus is offline  
Old 15th Jan 2010, 00:39
  #59 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: On the dark side of the moon
Posts: 976
Received 10 Likes on 4 Posts
Please explain how the decision to evacuate an aircraft that has sustained obvious structural damage in the fuel system areas could possibly be construed as unreasonable? Are you suggesting that you'd rather face the risk of a sudden outbreak of fire and almost certain casualties, than face having to explain how a few injured ankles resulted from what is quite obviously a rational decision in a high risk scenario? Yes there are times when an evacuation decision must be weighed carefully. Sorry, but based on the photos, this isn't one of them, IMHO.
J.O. is offline  
Old 15th Jan 2010, 02:16
  #60 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: alameda
Posts: 1,053
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
J.O.

if you looked at the photos, did you see a fuel leak? not a possible fuel leak, but a real fuel leak?

is there any published report that there was a fuel leak?

just wondering.
protectthehornet is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.