Incident at Heathrow
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 464
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Of course if the Captain did the walk around in this case then he should indeed have checked the cowls. Of course the Engineer signing the aircraft off should have secured them but then it is normal for the pilot to check and the engineers don't get offended, unlike some on this thread!
I believe some airlines don't even let the FO call stop on a rejected takeoff.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Alber
In BA an AMS is an aircraft maintenance supervisor. An AMS is B1 or B2 licenced. There are LAEs, licenced aircraft engineers, again B1 or B2 licenced. Technicians are A licenced. Lastly BA has mechanics with no licence. Mechanics are either ex-apprentices or direct entry. The direct entry mechanics vary from people with experience and possibly licences to guys who have little or no engineering experience of any sort.
Just for clarification.
In BA an AMS is an aircraft maintenance supervisor. An AMS is B1 or B2 licenced. There are LAEs, licenced aircraft engineers, again B1 or B2 licenced. Technicians are A licenced. Lastly BA has mechanics with no licence. Mechanics are either ex-apprentices or direct entry. The direct entry mechanics vary from people with experience and possibly licences to guys who have little or no engineering experience of any sort.
Just for clarification.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
previous incident
Some interesting reading...
Transportation Safety Board of Canada - Aviation Investigation Report A00O0199
And for those wondering what an unlatched cowl might look like, see the accompanying photos.
Transportation Safety Board of Canada - Aviation Investigation Report A00O0199
And for those wondering what an unlatched cowl might look like, see the accompanying photos.
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Location: Location:
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Apologies if someone has already asked this question. I can't claim to have ploughed through all 39 pages of the thread!
Why don't the cowling hinges incorporate a spring to partially but readily visibly open the cowlings any time the latches are not secured?
Why don't the cowling hinges incorporate a spring to partially but readily visibly open the cowlings any time the latches are not secured?
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Away from home Rat
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks "Great White Hunter" for that clarification..
AMS being the shift supervisor then..
LAE's Under the AMS and so on..
AMS being the shift supervisor then..
LAE's Under the AMS and so on..
Last edited by Alber Ratman; 1st Jun 2013 at 22:31.
As someone who has sat in terminals many times watching aircrew pre-departure inspections I would make the following comment......
I have seen and even timed some incredibly fast PDIs, often with the pilot scarcely looking at the actual aircraft, just a few cursory glances! As an unscientific generalisation, I have never seen a female pilot do anything but a very thorough inspection!
I sometimes get the impression that the inspection 'assumes' that everything will be OK having been checked previously by an engineer and that the aircrew inspection is merely a 'tick in the box'.
I have always taught that the inspection [in any circumstance] is the opportunity, may be the last opportunity, to discover a problem before that problem causes an even bigger problem. It requires time, concentration, thoroughness, detailed knowledge of the subject matter and the state of mind which 'expects' the unexpected.
I have only read about 50% of this thread, so please forgive any duplication and I make no comment on the specific incident concerning the BA aircraft.
I have seen and even timed some incredibly fast PDIs, often with the pilot scarcely looking at the actual aircraft, just a few cursory glances! As an unscientific generalisation, I have never seen a female pilot do anything but a very thorough inspection!
I sometimes get the impression that the inspection 'assumes' that everything will be OK having been checked previously by an engineer and that the aircrew inspection is merely a 'tick in the box'.
I have always taught that the inspection [in any circumstance] is the opportunity, may be the last opportunity, to discover a problem before that problem causes an even bigger problem. It requires time, concentration, thoroughness, detailed knowledge of the subject matter and the state of mind which 'expects' the unexpected.
I have only read about 50% of this thread, so please forgive any duplication and I make no comment on the specific incident concerning the BA aircraft.
N4790P
It requires time, concentration, thoroughness, detailed knowledge of the subject matter and the state of mind which 'expects' the unexpected.
I have only read about 50% of this thread, so please forgive any duplication and I make no comment on the specific incident concerning the BA aircraft.
I have only read about 50% of this thread, so please forgive any duplication and I make no comment on the specific incident concerning the BA aircraft.
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: FR
Posts: 234
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So on this occasion, a maintenance-related problem ended up in the news. On the other hand concerns have been raised about the continuous degradation of the working conditions, staff reductions, shorter turnarounds and so on. So it should be possible to quantify the effect - for example by looking for problems that have been spotted e.g. during walkaround(s) or problems which later developed during flight but were not serious enough to require reporting. Would the AAIB look into this matter?
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Hampshire physically; Perthshire and Pembrokeshire mentally.
Posts: 1,611
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I feel its totally unfair that the Capt/FO who did the check in this particular case is should be lambasted in any way..
For the record, I am a current Airbus TRE (and an ex-BA training captain) and have flown several thousand hours on the aircraft with both V2500 and CFM engines. The nature of the V2500 cowl latches is no secret. The flight crew member doing the inspection really needs to get down to check them. That used to be strongly emphasised to all converting pilots during line training.
It was dinned into me during my tyro days as a pilot (in the RAF) that one should never assume but always check. It is, after all, one's own pink body up there, not the engineer's. I'll leave it at that.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 43
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am really sorry if this has already been covered, but does anybody know what happened to the cowls when they detached from the aircraft. Where did they land. I have not seen any reports of them in a field anywhere.
In a former life as a Flight Engineer our company proceedures were that the captain also carried out a walk around on every sector. I am ashamed to say that they sometimes found defects which I missed during my inspection. There were no recriminations, they kept an eye on me and I kept an eye on them. I am amazed at today's 25 minute turnarounds, I guess if it flew in it will fly out.
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: London
Age: 66
Posts: 345
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am really sorry if this has already been covered, but does anybody know what happened to the cowls when they detached from the aircraft. Where did they land. I have not seen any reports of them in a field anywhere.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Somerset
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Does anyone know if the 'hold open' stays mounted on the inner face of the cowl door actually flail about when a door opens during T/O /flight ?
The Youtube vid showing cowl doors being opened and 'stayed' doesn't show the stowage fixing for the engine end of a stay - spring clip(s) or requiring a tool - or both ?
The demo' engineer appears to merely unclip a stay.
If these items flail around in the slipstream prior to door breakup one could imagine engine ancillaries possibly taking a fair old whacking.
The Youtube vid showing cowl doors being opened and 'stayed' doesn't show the stowage fixing for the engine end of a stay - spring clip(s) or requiring a tool - or both ?
The demo' engineer appears to merely unclip a stay.
If these items flail around in the slipstream prior to door breakup one could imagine engine ancillaries possibly taking a fair old whacking.
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: In my head
Posts: 694
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just for clarification ....
Where might this thread be going? 25 minute turnarounds were mentioned a few posts back. The more observant might note that usually means a different type on a different airline - one perhaps where unsecured latches on the tops rather than the bottoms of CFM56-7s are more likely to go unnoticed by all except observant wing seat passengers?
Is this thread not mostly about what happened when time or diligence were spared incorrectly ? And does the big picture that includes this incident not suggest a whole host of potential latent defects (perhaps within some of the other 95%+ 'mission critical' stuff poor NigelOnDraft can but assume specialists got right before handing over the aircraft to him for service?
Are we tempted to run for the dubious cover of incident statistics when we ask ourselves what other latent defects are being flown daily? Are we everyday missing defects which are mitigated or held together only by that thin but marvelous veneer of robustness and reliability in design that was honed from experience during an era when far more attention was paid to getting basic checks right?
Are we getting to the point that the human bit is the most unreliable part of the system?
Where might this thread be going? 25 minute turnarounds were mentioned a few posts back. The more observant might note that usually means a different type on a different airline - one perhaps where unsecured latches on the tops rather than the bottoms of CFM56-7s are more likely to go unnoticed by all except observant wing seat passengers?
Is this thread not mostly about what happened when time or diligence were spared incorrectly ? And does the big picture that includes this incident not suggest a whole host of potential latent defects (perhaps within some of the other 95%+ 'mission critical' stuff poor NigelOnDraft can but assume specialists got right before handing over the aircraft to him for service?
Are we tempted to run for the dubious cover of incident statistics when we ask ourselves what other latent defects are being flown daily? Are we everyday missing defects which are mitigated or held together only by that thin but marvelous veneer of robustness and reliability in design that was honed from experience during an era when far more attention was paid to getting basic checks right?
Are we getting to the point that the human bit is the most unreliable part of the system?
Last edited by slip and turn; 2nd Jun 2013 at 10:34.
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: York
Posts: 737
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wingswinger
Why haven't you posted your thoughts on the BA BALPA forum? It's not difficult to guess who you are, and I'm pretty sure I've seen you post there before, along with many other retirees. That way perhaps you could prompt a discussion amongst BA Airbus pilots as to how this item has been trained since your departure????
Rather than making anonymous, judgemental pronouncements when investigation's findings are a very long way from being made public!
Why haven't you posted your thoughts on the BA BALPA forum? It's not difficult to guess who you are, and I'm pretty sure I've seen you post there before, along with many other retirees. That way perhaps you could prompt a discussion amongst BA Airbus pilots as to how this item has been trained since your departure????
Rather than making anonymous, judgemental pronouncements when investigation's findings are a very long way from being made public!
Last edited by 4468; 2nd Jun 2013 at 10:43.
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: England
Posts: 730
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by piperr
Does anyone know if the 'hold open' stays mounted on the inner face of the cowl door actually flail about when a door opens during T/O /flight ?
The Youtube vid showing cowl doors being opened and 'stayed' doesn't show the stowage fixing for the engine end of a stay - spring clip(s) or requiring a tool - or both ?
The demo' engineer appears to merely unclip a stay.
If these items flail around in the slipstream prior to door breakup one could imagine engine ancillaries possibly taking a fair old whacking.
The Youtube vid showing cowl doors being opened and 'stayed' doesn't show the stowage fixing for the engine end of a stay - spring clip(s) or requiring a tool - or both ?
The demo' engineer appears to merely unclip a stay.
If these items flail around in the slipstream prior to door breakup one could imagine engine ancillaries possibly taking a fair old whacking.