UPS Aircraft Down In Dubai
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Feriton
Posts: 73
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A little more on the reporting system on the UPS plane:
The Canadian Press: AP sources: Fire aboard UPS plane that crashed in Dubai may have started in cargo compartment
UPS spokesman Mike Mangeot confirmed that the crashed plane was equipped with an airline health maintenance system, Boeing's name for the transmission system. He declined to comment directly on the crash or what information the company received from the plane before the accident.
AHM systems help "self-diagnose" problems in flight and alert the airline before landing so that maintenance workers are ready to do repairs and parts are on hand. The systems aren't standard on Boeing planes, but the company has been installing them on 747-400s for customers who request them for about five years, said Boeing spokesman Jim Proulx.
Among the data transmitted ahead of the Dubai crash, according to people familiar with the investigation, was an alert about a serious problem in the cargo compartment near the starboard wing.
AHM systems help "self-diagnose" problems in flight and alert the airline before landing so that maintenance workers are ready to do repairs and parts are on hand. The systems aren't standard on Boeing planes, but the company has been installing them on 747-400s for customers who request them for about five years, said Boeing spokesman Jim Proulx.
Among the data transmitted ahead of the Dubai crash, according to people familiar with the investigation, was an alert about a serious problem in the cargo compartment near the starboard wing.
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 245
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"With glass cockpits the norm now (i.e. digital) could this basic information be provided audibly by the flight computer into the headsets using a control column mounted switch selectable by the pilot when his/her instruments are deemed unreadable?"
Now that is an interesting idea. Rather than trying to fix the sense that is broken (sight), switch to another sense (in this case, hearing).
I like the way you think.
I don't know if it would work because I could see an information overload issue with too much data coming from too many instruments. But I think it's an idea worth thinking about, and I don't say that lightly.
Now that is an interesting idea. Rather than trying to fix the sense that is broken (sight), switch to another sense (in this case, hearing).
I like the way you think.
I don't know if it would work because I could see an information overload issue with too much data coming from too many instruments. But I think it's an idea worth thinking about, and I don't say that lightly.
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Sandpit
Posts: 312
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Do all airports have 121.5 ?
With a little co-ordination, Bahrein could have changed all traffic to a secondary freq, allowing Dubai to use the Bahrein freq as a discrete.
As for allowing another station to use the frequency, that depends entirely on whether the equipment at said station allows a freq. to be manually selected or not. Some main sets are selectable, some aren't. Many standby sets are, some aren't.
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Leeds, UK
Posts: 281
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
UPS ACARS messages
I have no inside knowledge, but would venture a good guess that the readings sent to UPS HQ via datalink are probably fire/smoke detector signals, and from the sound they knew which sensor first sounded the alarm, so they can backtrack from there.
I mean, any fire detection system worth it's salt doesn't just yell fire, it yell's fire because sensor X yelled fire. Helps you get there quick.
G
I mean, any fire detection system worth it's salt doesn't just yell fire, it yell's fire because sensor X yelled fire. Helps you get there quick.
G
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Oz
Posts: 148
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Apologies for the slight drift... the earlier post about the cabin crew & 'smoke' interests me...
As a CC, I'm curious as to what the procedure is at the pointy end if we call you with a 'smoke' or 'fire' event... Are you trained to ask us questions or to trust absolutely that we know exactly the situation? Of course, we are trained but the example given above shows that it's possible to miscommunicate and misunderstand each other.
In past airlines I've been taught that you never use the "F word" unless you can actually SEE visible flame... and that if you are seeing 'smoke' you say only 'smoke', with a descriptor (E.g. "I cannot see more than one economy seat row" or "I can see to L2 door from L3" etc etc)
If CC were to call you with "fire" is there any promtfor you to ask us if we can SEE it, or are you taught by training to just go with what we say? I understand that crew need to trust each other, however wouldn't you want to be absolutely sure about the information you receive? Does the procedure vary by airline, personal preference, or other factors?
Back to UPS, I too was wondering if audio cues could help, but weren't some other posters talking about excess wind/airflow noise? (Especially if the a/c is depressurised) would this cancel out any effectiveness of audio cues? I suppose it's better to have SOMETHING on the chance it can be heard, than not at all.
Also, would there be any benefit in having certain controls/switches given a tactile coating/shape so they can be more easily found in low light/smoke. (I realise that by years of use, most pilots probably know the locations, but undre stress would it be handy being able to KNOW you have th right switch/button, just by feel?)
We have them on the overwing exits on the B738, why not in the cockpit? Even some form of 'Braille' might have helped, especially on the radio switches...
Apologies for some out loud thinking, especially as a non-professional with limited flying experience (aside from the cabin end)
As a CC, I'm curious as to what the procedure is at the pointy end if we call you with a 'smoke' or 'fire' event... Are you trained to ask us questions or to trust absolutely that we know exactly the situation? Of course, we are trained but the example given above shows that it's possible to miscommunicate and misunderstand each other.
In past airlines I've been taught that you never use the "F word" unless you can actually SEE visible flame... and that if you are seeing 'smoke' you say only 'smoke', with a descriptor (E.g. "I cannot see more than one economy seat row" or "I can see to L2 door from L3" etc etc)
If CC were to call you with "fire" is there any promtfor you to ask us if we can SEE it, or are you taught by training to just go with what we say? I understand that crew need to trust each other, however wouldn't you want to be absolutely sure about the information you receive? Does the procedure vary by airline, personal preference, or other factors?
Back to UPS, I too was wondering if audio cues could help, but weren't some other posters talking about excess wind/airflow noise? (Especially if the a/c is depressurised) would this cancel out any effectiveness of audio cues? I suppose it's better to have SOMETHING on the chance it can be heard, than not at all.
Also, would there be any benefit in having certain controls/switches given a tactile coating/shape so they can be more easily found in low light/smoke. (I realise that by years of use, most pilots probably know the locations, but undre stress would it be handy being able to KNOW you have th right switch/button, just by feel?)
We have them on the overwing exits on the B738, why not in the cockpit? Even some form of 'Braille' might have helped, especially on the radio switches...
Apologies for some out loud thinking, especially as a non-professional with limited flying experience (aside from the cabin end)
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: JAPAN
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To " ExSp33db1rd"
I would have never believed my dad, who was a WW2 pilot. But he was right. Technology passes us and we are left on the way side. We are old, retired and useless. We remember, but no one cares. From 5 to 4. from 4 to 3, from 3 to 2.
And people think it's funny when there are proposals to have only one pilot in the cockpit. Just wait and see, that's all I can say. My fellow UPS flyers, RIP.
I would have never believed my dad, who was a WW2 pilot. But he was right. Technology passes us and we are left on the way side. We are old, retired and useless. We remember, but no one cares. From 5 to 4. from 4 to 3, from 3 to 2.
And people think it's funny when there are proposals to have only one pilot in the cockpit. Just wait and see, that's all I can say. My fellow UPS flyers, RIP.
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: EU
Posts: 644
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Flaps10, freighter is different from pax. System should shut down two packs and leave one running, but that's all automatic (result of recall actions: arming/pushing cargo fire pushbuttons)
Last edited by golfyankeesierra; 8th Sep 2010 at 10:03.
EXLEFTSEAT
Sad but true, my first airline type carried 3 pilots, two Flt. Engineers, 1 Radio officer, 1 navigator - also only 1 Stewardess ( and a few Stewards as well, of course )
I repeat - what we have now is 'progress' ?? or just economics ??
"Those who ignore History are doomed to repeat it" - or words to that effect - W.S.C.
Doesn't the next Generation ever learn ANYTHING ? (except how to programme an iSomething )
Sad but true, my first airline type carried 3 pilots, two Flt. Engineers, 1 Radio officer, 1 navigator - also only 1 Stewardess ( and a few Stewards as well, of course )
I repeat - what we have now is 'progress' ?? or just economics ??
"Those who ignore History are doomed to repeat it" - or words to that effect - W.S.C.
Doesn't the next Generation ever learn ANYTHING ? (except how to programme an iSomething )
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 1,501
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Going back a few years, some airliners had autopilot controls with buttons that were made so you could easily identify them by feel only. Newer aircraft often use the same type of buttons for different modes, so you need to feel and remember the correct position in order to identify them.
I know which cockpit I would prefer if I have smoke in the cockpit. This is a DC 9:
The life of a freight dog is worth less than the rest of us. Why else would we deny some dangerous goods cargo on passenger aircraft but allow the same DG on cargo aircraft?
I know which cockpit I would prefer if I have smoke in the cockpit. This is a DC 9:
The life of a freight dog is worth less than the rest of us. Why else would we deny some dangerous goods cargo on passenger aircraft but allow the same DG on cargo aircraft?
I was wrong in a previous post, you can reach the smoke evacuation handle with the mask on. I guess with more thought that's the way it should be designed. Interesting note in the QRH that if the source is not from the cockpit it will actually make things worse by drawing in smoke. Never stop learning.
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Manchester
Age: 45
Posts: 615
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The life of a freight dog is worth less than the rest of us. Why else would we deny some dangerous goods cargo on passenger aircraft but allow the same DG on cargo aircraft?
Whether or not this works in practice is quite another thing.
Quote:
The life of a freight dog is worth less than the rest of us. Why else would we deny some dangerous goods cargo on passenger aircraft but allow the same DG on cargo aircraft?
Because in theory the CAO freight is accessible on the maindeck by the crew, so can be dealt with if there is a problem.
Whether or not this works in practice is quite another thing.
The life of a freight dog is worth less than the rest of us. Why else would we deny some dangerous goods cargo on passenger aircraft but allow the same DG on cargo aircraft?
Because in theory the CAO freight is accessible on the maindeck by the crew, so can be dealt with if there is a problem.
Whether or not this works in practice is quite another thing.
, it was directed at Flaps10.Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Bangkok,Thailand
Posts: 106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It seems to be agreed that if there is a fire on board you have about 20 minutes to land or ditch the plane before it's too late. In the middle of the ocean that leaves just one option, and not a good one. Shouldn't fire suppression or fire fighting be the first course of action. Put down the list and put out the fire.
but what do I know?
but what do I know?
When landing UAVs, particularly at night, it is normal for the external pilot who does the take off and landing and is standing beside the runway holding something like an R/C model transmitter, to ask the internal pilot who is sitting in the ground control station, for information such as 'airspeed','altitude', 'range', 'pitch/roll' angles. A demand system such as this might work, whereas one with a constant stream of information may result in information overload.
Failing that, virtual reality goggles with their own air supply are the only thing I can think that might have helped in this instance if there is no way of clearing the cockpit of smoke.
Hands up who has bought a replacement lithium battery from China for their model aircraft,phone or laptop, only to have it arrive in a little paper envelope marked only with 'gift'? Scary isn't it.
Failing that, virtual reality goggles with their own air supply are the only thing I can think that might have helped in this instance if there is no way of clearing the cockpit of smoke.
Hands up who has bought a replacement lithium battery from China for their model aircraft,phone or laptop, only to have it arrive in a little paper envelope marked only with 'gift'? Scary isn't it.
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: USA
Posts: 40
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It seems to be agreed that if there is a fire on board you have about 20 minutes to land or ditch the plane before it's too late. In the middle of the ocean that leaves just one option, and not a good one. Shouldn't fire suppression or fire fighting be the first course of action. Put down the list and put out the fire.
Fire suppression is fine, but without fire extinguishing capability, there will be more hull losses. The crew must be able to stop fire, particularly as most airplanes these days are 2 person crews.
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: USA
Posts: 93
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Two man crew..No one to deal with the fire or to even look down stairs to see if something is on fire. You think there would be some way to put cameras in the cargo holds so the crew can see what is going on below.