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

Incident at Heathrow

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

Incident at Heathrow

Old 28th May 2013, 12:34
  #521 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: london
Posts: 242
Originally Posted by Flap 80 View Post
.....totally impracticable on a walkround for flight crew to lie under the engine to confirm latch closure especially if cowling weight gives impression of totally closed and if latches have been secured closed when cowling was open...
So it's entirely possible, probable even, the pilot performing the walkround checked the cowl doors & believed them to be properly latched.

Would it be worth pilots feeling the difference between a secure and insecure cowl door side-by-side? Not my aircraft, but I'd have thought there'd be some telltale sign that could be easily verified on walkround, even without that banned screwdriver, providing you knew exactly what to look for.

Last edited by Sillert,V.I.; 28th May 2013 at 12:36.
Sillert,V.I. is offline  
Old 28th May 2013, 12:57
  #522 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: England
Posts: 1,955
Originally Posted by Agaricus bisporus View Post
fnaaar!

Steady, you'll be upsetting engineers with implications of illiteracy...
You there! Dismantle that, take it over there and mantle it up again.

Allosaurus,
Also I think you might have impuned the integrity of many LAME.s by suggesting that its just ink on paper.,that LAME,s dont do their job correctly and sign for things in the tech log that they havent done?
Definitely not my intention to question anyone's integrity. More a case of forgetting to do something but remembering to sign for it. I've signed for a PDI before having forgotten to do it so even the best make mistakes.
Lord Spandex Masher is offline  
Old 28th May 2013, 13:12
  #523 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 2,044
There have been ~5500 A320 series delivered. They do, say 3 sectors per day, and 1 "daily service" opening the cowls. An engineering team might meet say 20 (?) aircraft on an evening shift to service overnight.

There have been ~15 "loss of cowl(s)" incidents, nil accidents AFAIK (although that would require a close look at the definition - NB damage to engines and cowlings is not counted).

Is a repetitive paperwork, or rigour, exercise going to solve the issue? In times of cost/manning pressures? Or are these very rare "slips" better solved by trying to easily highlight the problem prior dispatch as previous recommendations have stated (and been ignored)?

Last edited by NigelOnDraft; 28th May 2013 at 13:19.
NigelOnDraft is offline  
Old 28th May 2013, 13:36
  #524 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: England
Posts: 1,387
How much does a door sensor cost? My car, microwave oven, the washing machine and even my fridge all have one.
cwatters is offline  
Old 28th May 2013, 14:01
  #525 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: uk
Posts: 655
It would, of course, be a requirement to open the cowls every day to check the "cowl door open" warning system was working.
oxenos is offline  
Old 28th May 2013, 14:09
  #526 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: turn L @ Taupo, just past the Niagra Falls...
Posts: 585
Maybe a silly suggestion, coming from the "cheap seats" GA... but all this talk of dry cleaning bills, AD's, sensors, EICAM etc., worries me a little. Can't help but wonder, would a little lo-tech help with confirming the cowl latch position, without all this hassle, heartache, expense and drama? Something like, maybe, a mirror on a stick?

Just a thought...
RadioSaigon is offline  
Old 28th May 2013, 14:14
  #527 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: uk
Posts: 120
Or a flight engineer prepared to get his knees wet.
I await the incoming!
screwdriver is offline  
Old 28th May 2013, 17:26
  #528 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: UK
Age: 75
Posts: 349
latching good

Some time in the fifties car makers discovered that if the bonnet opens while you are mobile bad things can happen.

They decided to have two latches one holds the bonnet closed good and proper the other just holds it more or less down but stops it coming any further up. It also allows it to project a bit so you notice the upsticking and vibrate a bit so you wonder what the noise is

They did this because they knew every so ofter one latch just isn't enough

Maybe there is a mesage, one latch holds the cover downish the other holds it nice and snug. You could even put a little contact to say first latch only engaged gov do something

When a problem has happened several times on similar types we ought to do something
Tinribs is offline  
Old 28th May 2013, 17:32
  #529 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Malton, North Yorkshire
Age: 68
Posts: 30
Latches unlatched but stowed - no indications!?

I am not an airline pilot or ground crew member, but am an aerospace engineer of some 35 years standing, having worked on mainly military stuff.
Forgive me if someone else has previously raised this point, but I think not. It seems to me that, having read all the preceding posts and watched intently the video
( - particularly at 8.45mins in!) there may be a 'bum trick' been missed by other posters concerning the cowl latching on the V2500.
If this video illustrates the current latching system, and I'll be the first to admit that it's now some 3 years old, so may not, it appears nevertheless that each cowl latch may be able to be pushed home/flush WITHOUT THE HOOK OF THE LATCH ENGAGED on its corresponding pin/toggle and the LATCH HELD FLUSH by it's trigger/button! The cowls seem to fall closed or near to closed in this situation.
I cannot therefore see any way in which, given this scenario, :-
A) the latches could be easily observed to be unlatched, on a walk-round or by ground crew observation or the like
B) any painting of the latches in fluorescent colours or likewise would aid the identification of an unlatched latch
C) the cowls could be easily seen to be gaping/unlatched with the aircraft at rest.
Having looked at the latch design (from H******l, I assume) it seems not beyond the wit of man to engineer a latch that CANNOT be closed unless it is fully hooked onto its mating pin/toggle, such that unlatched latches would definitely hang down from the nacelle. Paint 'em fluorescent then, if you like, and they would almost definitely be noticed!
kenjaDROP is offline  
Old 28th May 2013, 17:42
  #530 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Malton, North Yorkshire
Age: 68
Posts: 30
Wilnot

re. post #509

apologies, just read yours in more detail....seems like we are thinking along the same lines!
kenjaDROP is offline  
Old 28th May 2013, 17:44
  #531 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Essex
Posts: 293
Was pleased to note in the tech log on the A319 I flew today.
...after overnight maintenance. " engine cowls closed and checked" and then another entry, "double independent inspection of engine cowls"
This is also true of oil filler caps after replenishment and has been for a long time at Ezy. (well at my base anyway)
doubtfire is offline  
Old 28th May 2013, 18:09
  #532 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Stockholm Sweden
Age: 70
Posts: 570
They do, say 3 sectors per day, and 1 "daily service"
On the BA A319s the fan cowls are not routinely opened until the weekly check. The engine oil is checked every night, but there is a good access panel for that. There is rarely any reason to open the fan cowls, except for the weekly check of the IDG oil levels.
On most engines, there is an access panel for the IDG oil check, but not on the V2500. I wonder if a modification to fit an IDG service panel would be justifyed because it might stop the next cowl loss?
Swedish Steve is offline  
Old 28th May 2013, 18:57
  #533 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: england
Posts: 274
Swedish Steve. Good point, the fan cowls also need opening to carry out Bearing 1 2 3 MCD chk.
yotty is offline  
Old 28th May 2013, 19:11
  #534 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: London, UK
Posts: 112
There are two interesting regulatory issues arising from this incident:

1. AAIB/FAA etc. recommendations versus ADs. This seems to be an instance where, in retrospect, one would wish that an AD had been issued following previous similar incidents. One wonders why this didn't happen, given that a double cowl separation could easily arise from a single maintenance/inspection SNAFU and could fatally compromise twin-engine redundancy.

2. What actions operators should take in the time lag between the AAIB starting its investigation and publication of its report. To give one example (which sadly involved friends of mine): in July 2009 a four year old girl fell through the railings at the top of the integral airstairs of a RYR 737-800 at STN. There was an AAIB investigation leading to a report which was published just over a year later in August 2010. This time lag was unfortunately too great to prevent a recurrence of exactly the same incident to another little girl at Girona in June 2010.

There is anecdotal evidence on this board of operators taking immediate action to tighten their procedures - and their engine cowls. And there is a wide spectrum between incidents which require a whole fleet to be grounded immediately (e.g. 787 batteries) and stuff which can be kicked into next year. But the two Ryanair incidents show that operators can't be relied upon to get things right prior to the regulator's report and recommendation - so perhaps more is required from the regulators in the interim?

(Finally - please don't jump on the fact that I've mentioned two RYR incidents. I'm sure there are similar 'regulatory lag' examples out there involving other operators.)

Last edited by J-Class; 28th May 2013 at 19:21.
J-Class is offline  
Old 28th May 2013, 19:31
  #535 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: California
Age: 51
Posts: 203
[quoteaveReidUK]
I'm [sure] there are similar 'regulatory lag' examples out there involving other operators.
[/quote]

You mean like a voluntary recall due to pitot tube icing.
xcitation is offline  
Old 28th May 2013, 19:37
  #536 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 873
Thankfully BA have announced they are not going to dish out sack loads of compo to SLF delayed by this incident.

Bad s***t happens folks so get over it!

Last edited by vctenderness; 28th May 2013 at 19:38.
vctenderness is offline  
Old 28th May 2013, 21:13
  #537 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 12,300
[quote DaveReidUK]I'm [sure] there are similar 'regulatory lag' examples out there involving other operators.
Xcitation, if you're going to use quotes, please attribute them accurately.Those are not my words, in fact I have no idea what you are talking about.

Your quote comes from the post immediately preceding yours, from J-Class, who I'm sure will be happy to address whatever point you were trying to make.
DaveReidUK is online now  
Old 28th May 2013, 22:25
  #538 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Durham
Age: 59
Posts: 187
What I cannot understand is the posts about unlatched cowlings, but both engines on the BA aircraft showed problems. I can believe that one cowling was undone and blew off, but two? I'd appreciate an explanation, theory, conjecture or even gossip.
mercurydancer is offline  
Old 28th May 2013, 22:43
  #539 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: London, UK
Posts: 112
The theory/conjecture is easy enough - presumably both engines were serviced prior to the flight, cowls on both not properly secured, the fact they were both open not noticed / not obvious to crew.

Last edited by J-Class; 28th May 2013 at 22:43.
J-Class is offline  
Old 28th May 2013, 23:38
  #540 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Banbury
Posts: 89
Tinribs

"Some time in the fifties car makers discovered that if the bonnet opens while you are mobile bad things can happen.

They decided to have two latches one holds the bonnet closed good and proper the other just holds it more or less down but stops it coming any further up. It also allows it to project a bit so you notice the upsticking and vibrate a bit so you wonder what the noise is

They did this because they knew every so ofter one latch just isn't enough"

We call this method of working a FAIL SAFE do we not?
Leftofcentre2009 is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

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

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.